australian indigenous language learner’s guides for
TRANSCRIPT
Australian Indigenous Language Learner’s Guides for Revitalisation:
Language Acquisition and Materials Evaluation
Yu-Ting Chiang
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of
Master of Applied Linguistics
School of Languages and Linguistics
University of Melbourne
June 2019
Australian Indigenous Language Learner’s Guides for Revitalisation:
Language Acquisition and Materials Evaluation
Yu-Ting Chiang
i
Abstract
Given that many Australian Indigenous communities have undergone language loss and
wish to (re)learn their heritage language, and that existing learner’s guides for these
languages written by linguists are limited in their pedagogical capacities, this study is set
out to investigate the current state and possible improvement of learner’s guides in
response to Penfield and Tucker’s (2011) call for applied linguists with an expertise in
language acquisition to step into this area. Specifically, this present study first adopts the
learner-centred second language acquisition (SLA) stance and interviews four community-
based language workers to identify the learning goals and needs of Indigenous
communities. The study also evaluates nine existing learner’s guides published over the
past four decades with Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011, 2016) principles proposed for SLA
materials development as the fundamental framework. Findings suggest that one of the
major learning goals of Indigenous communities be communicative competence, which
matches with Tomlinson’s (2016) emphasis. Additionally, comprehensibility is the most
salient issue of learner’s guides at present. To compare the insights of the interviewees in
this study and the results of the learner’s guides evaluation, it is found that the SLA
frameworks adopted in this study can indeed inform future development of learner’s
guides for Australian Indigenous languages, but the application requires modifications in
order to achieve cultural appropriateness, especially considering the colonial history of
Australia. Beyond learner’s guides per se, the governing principle of future learner’s
guides development is to have community consultation, involvement, and ideally,
initiation. Positioned as an initial attempt to bridge language revitalisation and SLA, this
study provides novel perspectives to both fields, introducing a theoretically and practically
informed approach to develop pedagogical materials for Indigenous languages and an
insight into a less studied audience in SLA research.
ii
Declaration
I hereby declare that this minor thesis contains only my original work, except for the
references that have been appropriately acknowledged. This thesis does not contain any of
my work that has been presented at conferences or appeared in previous publications.
The length of this thesis, exclusive of tables, references and appendices, is approximately
13,000 words.
____________________________________
Yu-Ting Chiang
iii
Acknowledgments
I am deeply indebted to my supervisors Professor Rachel Nordlinger and Dr Helen Zhao
for their continued support and invaluable insights. Rachel led me into the world of
Australian Indigenous languages, and Helen infused new possibilities into my exploration
in this fascinating world. Without their guidance and encouragement, this thesis would not
have been possible.
I am grateful to Emma Murphy, Ebony Joachim, Amy Parncutt, Andrew Tanner, and
Freya Scott from the Resource Network for Linguistic Diversity. It was my great honour
to have volunteered with them and witnessed the wonderful works they have been doing
with the Indigenous communities in Australia. I can never thank them enough for sharing
their knowledge and experience with me, along with laughter and cake! Special thanks go
to Professor Gillian Wigglesworth and Associate Professor Paul Gruba, who encouraged
and supported me to pursue the opportunity of working with these people.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Associate Professor Karen Steffen
Chung, Professor Jia-Ling Hsu, and Assistant Professor Shan-Shan Wang at my alma
mater National Taiwan University for opening the door to Linguistics for me and for
inspiring me in numerous ways. Every time I write, I feel especially thankful for Assistant
Professor Shan-Yun Huang and Ms Ann-Marie Hadzima, without whose solid teaching of
English academic writing I would not have been able to write so confidently.
My appreciation is sent to Yayuan Luo, Ikuna Yagi, Vina Darissurayya, Jaelani Jaelani,
and George Komori as well, who have been there from start to finish on this journey at the
University of Melbourne. I particularly owe a very important debt to Giovanni Ma for his
valuable feedback on my writing. I also treasure Yoichi Tagami’s “Let’s work harder
toady!” throughout the writing of our theses. I shall never forget to thank Jessie Liu, Erica
Gem Tayag, and Akshaya Kathiresh for making Melbourne feel like home.
Lastly, I must express my very profound gratitude to my parents, my two a-má’s, my
a-kong, my late maternal a-kong, and my partner Hao-Che Chien for their enormous
support and unending love.
iv
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2: Language Revitalisation in Australia .................................................................. 5
2.1 From the perspective of community-based linguistics ............................................... 5
2.2 From language documentation to learning materials .................................................. 7
2.3 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 9
Chapter 3: Language Learning Materials ........................................................................... 10
3.1 Learner-centred language acquisition ....................................................................... 10
3.2 Materials development and evaluation for English learning .................................... 12
3.3 Learning materials for Indigenous languages of the world ...................................... 14
3.4 Summary of gaps in the literature ............................................................................. 17
3.5 Research questions .................................................................................................... 18
Chapter 4: Methodology ..................................................................................................... 19
4.1 Materials evaluation .................................................................................................. 19
4.1.1 Source of data .................................................................................................... 19
4.1.2 Analytical approach ........................................................................................... 22
4.1.3 Analytical procedures ........................................................................................ 25
4.2 Interviews .................................................................................................................. 28
4.2.1 Participants ......................................................................................................... 28
4.2.2 Instruments ......................................................................................................... 29
4.2.3 Data collection procedures ................................................................................. 30
4.2.4 Analytical approach ........................................................................................... 30
4.2.5 Ethical considerations ........................................................................................ 31
Chapter 5: Results ............................................................................................................... 32
5.1 Materials evaluation .................................................................................................. 32
5.1.1 Common characteristics of the evaluated learner’s guides ................................ 32
5.1.2 Observed tendency towards alignment with SLA frameworks ......................... 34
5.2 Interviews .................................................................................................................. 37
5.2.1 Learning goals and needs of Indigenous users .................................................. 37
5.2.2 Issues with existing learner’s guides for users ................................................... 40
5.2.3 Suggestions of community language workers ................................................... 44
v
Chapter 6: Discussion ......................................................................................................... 49
6.1 Research question 1 .................................................................................................. 49
6.2 Research question 2 .................................................................................................. 52
6.3 Research question 3 .................................................................................................. 55
Chapter 7: Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 59
7.1 Summary of the study ............................................................................................... 59
7.2 Recommendations for future learner’s guide development ...................................... 60
7.3 Implications ............................................................................................................... 61
7.4 Limitations and directions for future research .......................................................... 62
References ........................................................................................................................... 63
Appendix A: Materials Evaluation of Existing Learner’s Guides ...................................... 72
Vászolyi (1979) ............................................................................................................... 72
Evans (1982) ................................................................................................................... 77
Goddard (1993) ............................................................................................................... 81
Laughren, Hoogenraad, Hale, and Granites (1996) ........................................................ 84
Nordlinger (1998) ........................................................................................................... 89
Turpin (2000) .................................................................................................................. 93
Simpson (2002) ............................................................................................................... 98
Green (2005) ................................................................................................................. 103
Amery and Simpson (2013) .......................................................................................... 107
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ....................................................................................... 112
vi
List of Tables
Table 1 List of evaluated learner’s guides (in chronological order) ................................... 20
Table 2 Coding scheme for evaluating learner’s guides ..................................................... 23
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Yeh’s (2015, p. 85) flow chart for developing a Hla’alua learner’s guide. ......... 15
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Since the first encounter with the European settlers in the 1780s, Australia has
experienced drastic language loss. Upon the earliest settlement, an estimated number of
250 distinct languages and 700–800 language varieties were spoken in Australia (Walsh,
1993; Koch & Nordlinger, 2014). Due to historical suppression of Australian Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander languages by the colonial government, and the continuous
promotion of English monolingualism into the recent decades (see e.g., McKay, 2008, for
the seven historical stages of language policy in Australia), at present, only 13 of the some
hundreds of Indigenous languages are still considered strong and steadily passed on to
younger generations (Marmion, Obata, & Troy, 2014, p. xii). The importance and
significance of preserving, maintaining and revitalising languages has recently gained
more public and governmental attention (Walsh, 2014). In the academic field of
linguistics, on the other hand, linguists have dedicated themselves to documenting
languages for decades in an effort to preserve the knowledge system and cultural heritage
embodied in the language.
In recent years, some attention has turned to revitalising languages that are no longer
spoken. In the context of language revitalisation, the development of language learning
materials is a crucial step for communities to (re)learn their language. Currently, a number
of learner’s guides to Australian Indigenous languages are available, credited to linguists’
good intentions to contribute to communities’ needs. Learner’s guides are essentially a
type of pedagogical grammar that involves both grammar description of the target
language and the goal to transmit metalinguistic knowledge to learners (Yeh, 2015).
However, among existing learner’s guides, several issues are of interest from an applied
linguistic perspective. For example, while compiling a learner’s guide, chances are
2
linguists refer to their specialised linguistics knowledge to explain language (e.g., de
Reuse, 1997; Warner, Geary, & Butler, 2018; see also Stebbins, Eira, & Couzens, 2018).
There would thus be an issue as to whether the materials are easily accessible for learners
without formal linguistics training, especially in terms of comprehension of disciplinary
terminology (see Czaywoska-Higgins, 2009; Rice, 2006). After all, as a pedagogical
device, a learner’s guide ought to be able to fulfil its purpose of effectively facilitating
users’ learning. This very position, according to Penfield and Tucker (2011), is where
applied linguists and their expertise in language acquisition should step in to transfer
linguistic documentation into effective learning materials for community-wide language
revitalisation (see also Anderson, 2011).
According to language acquisition theory, the learners’ role is central to the learning
process (see Larsen-Freeman, 2011). This current mainstream stance in the field
emphasises the activeness and autonomy of the learners, as well as their needs and
purposes of learning. In order to develop learner-centred materials, applied linguists
suggest that meaningful, authentic materials be adopted, such as Tomlinson (2010, 2011,
2016). Yet, research on materials development for second language acquisition (SLA
hereafter) is largely rooted in English learning, and discussion of Indigenous languages in
the discipline of SLA is scarce. In the field of language documentation and revitalisation,
there is also a paucity of discussion on language learning materials (Penfield & Tucker,
2011). Having acknowledged this gap and given the importance of learner’s guides for
Australian Indigenous languages, the present study is set out to respond to Penfield and
Tucker’s (2011) call for more applied linguistic perspectives in endangered language
studies by investigating whether—and how—current materials can meet users’ learning
needs and goals. More specifically, since SLA theory has evidently insightful implications
for the learning of languages other than English, such as Japanese (e.g., Ohta, 2001), this
3
study aims to probe how theories and methods of developing and evaluating English as a
second language (ESL hereafter) materials can relate or be extended to Australian
Indigenous language learning materials.
Despite the potential applicability of SLA theory to developing learner’s guides,
certain risks of this approach cannot yet be overlooked, including the great contextual
differences between the learning of endangered languages and that of major languages
(Penfield & Tucker, 2011). In addition, particularly because of the colonial history of
Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, the writing of learner’s guides as
a linguistic practice should consciously work towards the goal of decolonisation (see
Stebbins et al., 2018). One of the means to decolonising is self-determination of
Indigenous communities, which is widely emphasised by community-based linguists, such
as Bischoff and Jany (2018). By working and consulting with Indigenous communities, as
well as community workers who have extensive experience in undertaking Indigenous
language revitalisation projects, a learner’s guide is essentially able to take learner’s needs
into account at the same time.
With the awareness of decolonisation, this study adopts a qualitative approach and
consists of two aspects of research: evaluation of existing learner’s guides and interviews
with community linguists who have firsthand experiences in using such materials. In the
next chapter, I review the historical background and current state of Australian Indigenous
language revitalisation, which is especially linked to the global context from the
perspective of community-based linguistics. In Chapter 3, I review current discussion on
ESL materials development and evaluation, along with language learning materials for
Indigenous languages of the world. The lack of linkage between these two areas is
identified, followed by the research questions I wish to investigate in this study. In
Chapter 4, the methodology is stated, including the coding scheme for materials evaluation
4
and the details of interviews. I then present the findings from the materials evaluation and
interviews in Chapter 5 and discuss them with regard to previous studies in Chapter 6,
suggesting improvements for future development in this area accordingly. In Chapter 7,
after summarising, I provide a list of recommendations for future learner’s guide
development, discuss the implications and limitations of this study, and propose directions
for future research.
5
Chapter 2: Language Revitalisation in Australia
2.1 From the perspective of community-based linguistics
To situate this study on language learning materials in the Australian Indigenous
context, first of all, it is important to acknowledge the relationship between language, land
and people in Indigenous Australia. For many of the Indigenous communities, language is
directly linked to land, with the link between language and people derived from their
connection to land (Koch & Nordlinger, 2014; Rumsey, 1993; Sutton, 1997). This concept
has its root in a belief that creator figures ‘planted’ different languages onto different areas
while travelling across the landscape. As Rumsey (1993) explains, taking the Jawoyn in
the Northern Territory for example, “Jawoyn people are Jawoyn not because they speak
Jawoyn, but because they are linked to places to which the Jawoyn language is also
linked” (p. 200). Based on this ideology, a language is owned by the people who are
linked to a particular area of land and inherited from generation to generation (Rumsey,
1993; Sutton, 1997). Since language bears such strong connection to history and ancestry,
being essentially a vehicle for culture, language is a very important part of identity for
many Indigenous people (see Simpson, Caffery, & McConvell, 2010; Walsh, 2014, 2018).
As Sharpe (1993) observes, for instance, Bundjalung people from New South Wales
showed strong desire to revitalise their traditional language in order to reconnect to their
heritage. Furthermore, the positive correlation between language revitalisation and well-
being has been established in a number of studies (e.g., Walsh, 2018). On the other hand,
in light of the Indigenous worldview, it may only make sense if the community of the
target language is included and/or consulted when any practice is to be done related to the
language. Community-based linguistics, emphasising close relationship with communities,
can thus be argued as a culturally appropriate approach and an ideal form of linguistic
6
practice dealing with Indigenous languages. Not only in Australia, this stance is now
widely shared across the globe in the field of linguistics (see Bischoff & Jany, 2018). For
example, from Rice’s (2018) observation in Canadian Indigenous communities, social
justice is a ground for community-based research. Community workers and linguists
strongly advocate that the 4R principles underlie community-based practice, including
“respect, relevance, responsibility, and reciprocity on the part of the participants” (Rice,
2018, p. 34). McCarty (2018) also overviews revitalisation works in numerous Indigenous
communities of the world, suggesting seven principles for practising community-based
language planning (pp. 30–31). A core message from the principles is that communities’
needs and values should be centred and prioritised in language works. This is not always
an easy task and can be challenging at times. For instance, Adley-SantaMaria (1997), a
Native American linguist, and de Reuse (1997), a non-Indigenous linguist, have already
pointed out the inevitability of compromising their respective ideology during their
collaboration on a Western Apache textbook. Particularly, as Rice (2006) later observes,
“the grammatical models that linguists are interested in are not necessarily appropriate
models for language teaching” (p. 148; see also Czaywoska-Higgins, 2009). Various other
issues may also emerge, such as the fact that the ‘difficult’ metalanguage or language
being taught in learning materials may discourage those without formal linguistics training
and familiarity with linguistic jargon (Rice, 2006; Stebbins et al., 2018). Such potential
issues indicate the importance of considering the communities’ needs when researchers
conduct any relevant linguistic practice.
In the Australian context, in addition to the traditional cultures, the historical and
political complexity cannot be overlooked, either. Different from some Indigenous
communities having undergone colonisation as well, such as the Māori of New Zealand,
the Australian government does not have treaty-making with local nations in history
7
(Hobson, 2018). This leads to continuing nuanced tensions between Indigenous and non-
Indigenous groups to date. Linguists thus emphasise the significance of decolonising
language research more than ever (e.g., Stebbins et al., 2018). ‘Decolonialism’ (termed as
‘decolonisation’ in the present study), as Leonard (2018) defines, from an emic
perspective as a citizen of the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma, USA, “is a way of thinking and
acting that emphasizes the sovereignty, peoplehood, intellectual traditions, and cultural
values of groups that experience colonialism” (p. 56). Leonard’s (2018) definition
corresponds to the stance of Stebbins et al. (2018) “that language revitalisation is very
largely a reclamation of the right to knowledge—of a form of sovereignty, in the sense of
authority over one’s own business” (p. 49). In other words, to achieve the goal of
decolonisation, self-determination of Indigenous communities should be applied as a
framework for language research (Stebbins et al., 2018).
2.2 From language documentation to learning materials
The extent of language loss in Australia means that for many Indigenous languages,
there are no longer any fluent speakers. Such languages have come to be called ‘sleeping’
languages (Amery & Gale, 2008), and this language status poses adversities for
revitalisation works and language materials development. Under such circumstances
without first language speakers modelling the language, Amery and Gale (2008) suggest
that “the original source materials, in the absence of other information, [be] the ultimate
authority” (p. 343) that language workers refer to as authentic materials (see also Amery,
2018). This type of material can “give an insight into fluent discourse, in a way that is now
impossible to do with live speakers” (Sharpe, 1993, p. 80). However, it is not always so
straightforward since for many languages, there is a lack of documented materials (e.g.,
Amery, 2018; Amery & Buckskin, 2012). This relates to the oral tradition of Australian
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages. Only with the arrival of the Europeans
8
did languages start to be recorded in written form. Early documentation made by non-
Indigenous scholars was very scarce and unsystematic (Oates, 1990; Singer, 2018), and
early recordings were made usually “under poor [recording] conditions with background
noise” (Sharpe, 1993, p. 81). Indigenous people were not likely to record their language
heritage in the climate where the language was considered of less value due to legislative
suppression and English dominance (Oates, 1990, discussing two exceptions). It was not
until the 1970s that the awareness of language endangerment was raised globally, and that
documentation works on Indigenous languages started to grow substantially both in
quantity and quality in Australia (Singer, 2018).
Despite numerous obstacles discussed above, successful examples of language
revitalisation can still be found all over the world. For example, the formerly sleeping
Wampanoag spoken in south-eastern New England, USA, is now being taught to
community members of all ages (McCarty, 2018). As McCarty (2018) notes, the
revitalisation work was initiated by an individual, jessie little doe baird1, who began in
1992 to work with linguists and learn through historical documents (see also Penfield &
Tucker, 2011). In Adelaide, South Australia, Jack Buckskin exemplifies another success
with the Kaurna language (Amery & Buckskin, 2012). While Kaurna has embarked on its
revival journey since 1990 already with song writing and language courses (Amery, 2018),
Jack Buckskin represents a new generation of revitalising Kaurna. According to Amery
and Buckskin (2012), working through documented works and developing contemporary
materials are meaningful and useful steps to (re)learn the language. On the other hand, in
the case of Kaurna, the local language centre plays a significant role in the revitalisation
work (Amery & Buckskin, 2012). In fact, regional language centres in Australia are at a
unique position in language works (see Amery & Gale, 2008; Walsh, 2014). As “a key
1 jessie little doe baird spells her name without capitalisation (Lutz, 2007).
9
meeting point for academic linguists and Indigenous communities” (Singer, 2018, p. 268),
language centres are a safe and ideal place for non-Indigenous linguists and Indigenous
communities to conduct linguistic practice side by side.
2.3 Summary
In sum, because of the centrality of language to individual identity for Australian
Indigenous people, many individuals and communities hope to (re)learn and revitalise
their traditional language in order to reconnect to their heritage. Given language loss
resulting from the colonial history, without fluent speakers in communities, people may
need to start their (re)learning from documented materials. There is thus a need to develop
learning materials catering to these learners’ needs, especially when historical
documentation may not be easily accessible for community people due to the often-
sketchy conditions and scholarly nature. Both the current state of languages and the
colonial history are particular challenges for developing Australian Indigenous language
materials and applying SLA theory primarily built upon acquisition of English as a second
language. However challenging, inspired by the successful progress of several Indigenous
communities’ revitalisation works across the globe and in Australia in particular (see
Walsh, 2014), this present study contributes to the field of language revitalisation by
discussing learning materials, also known as learner’s guides, from an SLA perspective.
The next chapter will thus discuss language learning materials drawing from the literature
of materials evaluation, as well as from previous studies on materials developed for
Indigenous languages of the world.
10
Chapter 3: Language Learning Materials
3.1 Learner-centred language acquisition
Having acknowledged that fluent speakers are often not easily found in many
Australian Indigenous communities in the previous chapter, this study focuses on the
context where communities or individuals wish to (re)learn their languages chiefly through
learner’s guides. This setting, while similar to second language learning in the sense that
not much of target language input is available from the environment2, differs from second
language learning that usually takes place under instruction (see Yeh, 2015). Namely, the
(re)learning of an Indigenous language is assumed to be an uninstructed self-learning
setting outside of classrooms. Note that, in any case, the motivations, purposes and goals
of (re)learning an Indigenous language and those of learning a major language are
essentially different (Penfield & Tucker, 2011). For those who aim at an Indigenous
language, “learning the language is not the entire goal in itself, [but] it is a means to
cultural revitalization” (Warner et al., 2018, p. 221). Take Mutsun native to California,
USA, for example; learners’ goals vary from becoming a fluent speaker to having the
ability to recite a prayer in the language (Warner et al., 2018). The (re)learning is a way to
reconnect to one’s own traditional culture, community and identity. In comparison,
learners of, say, English, are often motivated for educational, vocational and recreational
purposes, and so on. Such learning goals are usually based on the need or want to be part
of a new speech community (e.g., Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Gardner & Lambert, 1972).
2 In the field of language acquisition, some researchers distinguish ‘second language’ from ‘foreign language,’ with the former being learned in the target speech community whereas the latter, outside of the target speech community. Therefore, foreign language learners do not have access to the target language via environmental input and usually rely on classroom instruction or various language materials. Such a distinction is not the focus of this present study; the rather generic term ‘second language’ is thus adopted.
11
In SLA research, learners’ motivations, needs, purposes and goals are all important
elements that cannot be ignored (e.g., Council of Europe, 2001). The currently shared
stance in the field of SLA emphasises that the learner’s role is positioned at the core of
language learning where they “are active through experimentation, problem-solving, and
dialoguing” (Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 162). In addition, language is widely regarded as a
social fact which goes beyond the structures and other linguistic features of language per
se (Larsen-Freeman & Freeman, 2008; Larsen-Freeman, 2011). Thus, the focus of SLA
research has shifted from being merely on linguistic competence (i.e., language per se) to
focusing more on communicative competence pertinent to a broader social context (i.e.,
language use). Proposed by Hymes (1972) to supplement Chomsky’s (1965) notion of
linguistic competence as static knowledge of language structure, ‘communicative
competence’ has been built upon over the decades. To inform SLA pedagogy, for
example, Celce-Murcia, Dörnyei, and Thurrell (1995) suggest five components
encompassed in the communicative construct, including:
• Discourse competence: the ability of selecting and arranging words, structures
and sentences into a cohesive text;
• Linguistic competence: the knowledge of lexical, phonological and grammatical
systems;
• Actional competence: the ability of conveying intention with appropriate
linguistic form and understanding others’ intention by recognising the utilised
linguistic form, i.e., pragmatic competence;
• Sociocultural competence: the knowledge of the appropriate ways to express
messages in a specific social and cultural context;
• Strategic competence: the knowledge of communication strategies and the
appropriate ways to use them
12
In short, communicative competence captures “the knowledge of when and how to say
what to whom” (Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 157). The Douglas Fir Group (2016) further
proposes a three-level framework to explain the multilayered nature of second language
learning, including the learner’s cognition at the micro level, the social context at the meso
level, and the macro level of “large-scale, society-wide ideological structures with
particular orientations toward language use and language learning” (p. 24). Namely,
within a certain culture, “people express themselves and interpret the expressions of
others” according to certain cultural values resulting from their shared “social space and
history” (Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 156).
3.2 Materials development and evaluation for English learning
With an aim to better match learning materials with SLA theory in general,
Tomlinson (2016) outlines five principles for materials development and evaluation, as
follows:
• Principle 1: That the learners are exposed to a rich, re-cycled, meaningful and
comprehensible input of language in use;
• Principle 2: That the learners are affectively engaged;
• Principle 3: That the learners are cognitively engaged;
• Principle 4: That the learners are sometimes helped to pay attention to form
whilst or after focusing on meaning;
• Principle 5: That the learners are given plentiful opportunities to use the language
for communication (pp. 20–23)
To situate Tomlinson’s (2016) principles in the Douglas Fir Group’s (2016) framework,
the five principles overall focus on the micro level and its correlation to the meso level by
establishing learners’ communicative competence. In Principle 1, Tomlinson (2016)
suggests that teachers provide a real-world text at the start of a lesson, such as a poem or a
13
story. Such materials provide ‘rich’ amount of language in use, as well as structural
repetitions in text composition, which can be ‘re-cycled’ by learners in a sense that they
are exposed to abundant models of contextualised language and can revisit them during
and after the lesson. This type of material is considered authentic and ‘meaningful,’ for it
reflects real-world language in use and culturally relevant topics that possibly resonate
with learners’ life experiences (see also Larsen-Freeman, 2011). Being meaningful further
relates to Principle 2, which is set on the basis that any emotion aroused “whilst learning
or experiencing the target language is a powerful facilitator of language acquisition”
(Tomlinson, 2016, p. 22). As for the ‘comprehensible’ feature of Principle 1, it has a
strong linkage to Principle 3 addressing learners’ cognitive capacities. Specifically,
learning materials should consist of “challenging but achievable tasks which require high-
level, critical and creative thinking” (Tomlinson, 2016, p. 22). Corresponding to this
principle, the Common European Framework for Reference for Languages also
recommends a staged design for language learning materials catering to learners of
different proficiency levels (Council of Europe, 2001; see also Tomlinson & Masuhara,
2017). On the other hand, with a focus on communicative competence, Principle 4
suggests that learners be first provided with meaning-based texts and to identify the
modelled structures on their own from the given contextualised language; meanwhile, or
afterwards depending on learners’ needs, the instructor or material guides their attention to
a target structure of study where necessary. With rich input, Principle 5 proposes that
learners should have plenty of practice to produce meaningful language in socialised and
contextualised interaction (see also Ohta, 2001).
Tomlinson’s (2016) principles and most SLA studies primarily focus on instructed
classroom learning settings. Yet, the five principles can in fact be considered universal for
both instructed and uninstructed learning. For example, the richness of authentic,
14
culturally relevant materials is already celebrated in Kane’s (1998) review on a ‘teach
yourself’ guide for Cantonese. The essence of the five principles has also been reiterated
in Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011) guidelines for self-access materials development3 (see also
Tomlinson & Masuhara, 2017). Additional features that Tomlinson (2010, 2011) proposes
for self-access materials are ‘open-ended’ and ‘text-driven.’ On the one hand, without
instruction, learners need even richer models available to correct their own performance.
These models should not be constrained to only one correct answer set but include a
variety of examples showing how native speakers or other learners may perform, namely,
‘open-ended’ answers (Tomlinson, 2010, 2011). On the other hand, Tomlinson (2010,
2011) highlights the role of texts in self-learning settings. It is recommended that authentic
texts be the start point and main source of learning, providing learners with “an experience
which engages them holistically (e.g., listening to a song) . . . and finally invit[ing] [them]
to return to the experience in order to focus on a specific linguistic or pragmatic feature of
[the texts]” (Tomlinson, 2010, p. 76). Apart from Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011) guidelines for
self-learning materials development, Kane (1998) also states that the content of self-
guided learning materials should be as ‘accessible’ and ‘practical’ for learners as possible.
In other words, the use of plain language is preferred considering comprehensibility, and
expressions reflecting real-world language use should be the learning target in terms of
practicality, unlike formal descriptive grammars addressed to linguists (Kane, 1998).
3.3 Learning materials for Indigenous languages of the world
SLA frameworks are largely built on research into English learning, as reviewed in
the previous section, while also having been extended to the learning of other modern
languages, such as Japanese (Ohta, 2001), Chinese (Chen, Wang, & Cai, 2010) and
3 Note that the materials Tomlinson (2010, 2011) discusses are specifically developed for self-access language learning centres in the USA, where learners either partially or fully self-direct their learning with access to extrinsic support, such as feedback from centre faculty and technological devices.
15
European languages (Council of Europe, 2001). The application of SLA theory to
developing learning materials for Indigenous languages of the world is very limited. A
notable exception is Yeh’s (2015) study where she draws from SLA theory to develop a
learner’s guide for Hla’alua, native to Taiwan. She proposes a flow chart for the early
stages of learner’s guides development (Figure 1), emphasising the investigation of users’
needs. Warner et al. (2018), on the other hand, acknowledge their lack of consultation
with SLA frameworks while designing pedagogical materials for Mutsun since the goal of
producing any materials was prioritised. Despite not having recruited experts in SLA
materials development, Warner et al. (2018) designed their second textbook according to
their own experiences with university textbooks for European languages (cf. their first
design resembles more a simplified descriptive grammar as they describe).
Figure 1. Yeh’s (2015, p. 85) flow chart for developing a Hla’alua learner’s guide.
While only a few researchers explicitly call for the adoption of SLA theories and
methods in materials development for Indigenous languages, such as Hermes, Bang and
Marin (2012, on Ojibwe native to northern America) and Penfield and Tucker (2011),
many other studies on Indigenous materials have in fact touched on topics discussed by
16
SLA researchers. For example, the significance of learners’ needs is raised by Adley-
SantaMaria (1997) working on Western Apache. Only when the audience and their needs
are identified can developers have clear directions in what to include in and how to
construct learning materials. Where applicable, a needs assessment can be informative
prior to materials design (Malone, 2003, on a Yup’ik maintenance program in USA). In
addition, materials should be both linguistically and culturally authentic, for language and
culture are inseparable (Siekmann, Webster, Samson, & Moses, 2017). In terms of
linguistic authenticity, de Reuse (1997) and Hermes et al. (2012) advocate the application
of everyday language (see also Amery & Gale, 2008; Christie, 2017, in the Australian
context). De Reuse (1997), being non-Indigenous, further notes that, while developing a
textbook for Apache, he collected language models from community members instead of
trying to produce any on his own. As for cultural authenticity, Siekmann et al. (2017)
recommend adopting in materials development culturally responsive frameworks that
“reflect and accurately represent ancestral knowledge and worldview” (p. 2; see also
Christie, 2017, complying with traditional learning metaphors in Yolŋu). On the other
hand, the use of multimedia technology can be useful to facilitate learning by providing
rich language models. Examples include the demonstration of three Irish dialects in the
pedagogical materials reviewed by Hickey and Stenson’s (2016) and that of correct
pronunciation in Yeh’s (2015) Hla’alua learner’s guide sample.
Among various types of pedagogical materials for Indigenous languages, de Reuse
(1997) observes that those integrating the teaching of grammar and other language skills
such as speaking are especially successful in the Native American context. Linked to
Tomlinson’s (2016) principles for SLA materials development, such integration roughly
aligns with Principle 4 that the teaching of grammar should supplement the teaching of
communicative competence where appropriate. Compared to others that either only teach
17
grammar or avoid grammar, the integrated model matches better with SLA theory at a
quick glance, assumed to have a better capacity of facilitating language learning. However
theoretically promising, to draw the materials of Warner et al. (2018) with de Reuse’s
(1997) observation, the grammar-oriented material is reported to be preferred by learners
of Mutsun to the integrated type. This mismatch of expectations for materials between the
developers and learners marks the importance of investigating the learners’ needs.
3.4 Summary of gaps in the literature
Concluding from the review of English as a Second Language (ESL) and Indigenous
language materials development, there appears to be a potential linkage between the two
traditionally independent academic areas. Particularly, in spite of the fact that most of the
material developers for Indigenous languages of the world do not explicitly consult with
SLA theory, researchers from the two areas both emphasise the significance of learners’
needs and goals, the inextricability of learning language and culture, as well as features
that materials should possess in order to effectively facilitate learning. It is also worth
noting that, similar to the literature of ESL learning materials, the majority of previous
studies on Indigenous language learning materials emerge from instructed learning
settings, such as immersion programs or community/university language classes. On the
other hand, while a number of materials aiming at adult learners are addressed here,
including Adley-SantaMaria (1997), de Reuse (1997) and Warner et al. (2018), existing
materials for Indigenous languages of the world are primarily designed for children as Yeh
(2015) identifies (e.g., Long, 2007, student workbooks for Gumbaynggirr in New South
Wales; see also https://bit.ly/2Tj8U05 for Taiwanese Indigenous language materials).
These observations suggest that more studies on self-learning materials for Indigenous
languages targeting adults (e.g., Yeh, 2016) are required, especially given the decreasing
number of speakers in Indigenous communities across the globe.
18
3.5 Research questions
From Chapters 2 and 3, a gap is identified in the literature of materials development
for adults’ self-learning of Indigenous languages of the world, alongside the lack of
consultation with SLA theory. Particularly in Australia, where many of the Indigenous
communities are losing fluent speakers, there appears to be a necessity of building useful
learner’s guides that cater to learners’ needs and goals and facilitate the (re)learning of
heritage languages and, eventually, language revitalisation. Therefore, this study aims to
evaluate the current state of learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous languages and to
propose potential improvements for the field. To this end, the study will focus on the
following research questions.
RQ1: How are the features of existing learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous
languages meeting users’ learning goals and needs?
RQ2: How can existing frameworks in SLA materials development inform the
development of learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous languages?
RQ3: How can learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous languages be improved?
19
Chapter 4: Methodology
In order to address the research questions raised in the previous chapter, I applied
two qualitative research approaches: materials evaluation of existing learner’s guides and
interviews with community language workers. The materials evaluation can inform RQ1
in terms of the current state of learner’s guides, as well as RQ2 based on analyses adopting
SLA frameworks, whereas interviews are analysed to address RQ1 in regard to the
learning purposes and needs of learner’s guide users. Note that the target audiences of
learner’s guides may vary depending on language statuses. This study particularly
conducts the investigation from the community users’ perspective and in revitalisation
settings. Findings from both approaches are discussed to answer RQ3 in Chapter 6.
4.1 Materials evaluation
4.1.1 Source of data
A total number of nine learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous languages were
collected and evaluated for the purpose of this study. The materials were accessed from
the libraries of the University of Melbourne, collections of the Resource Network for
Linguistic Diversity (RNLD), and personal collections of one of my supervisors Professor
Rachel Nordlinger. I targeted materials labelled as a learner’s guide or a ‘teach yourself’
guide for adult learners (cf. Long, 2007, for children). Among the materials used in this
study, the publication years range from the late 1970s to early 2010s as listed in Table 1
along with a brief introduction of each language and its speech community. The evaluated
guides present a fair chronological distribution, providing an overview of the current state
of learner’s guides over the past four decades.
20
Table 1 List of evaluated learner’s guides (in chronological order)
Author(s) Year Page# Language and the community
Teach Yourself Wangkatja: An Introduction to
the Western Desert Language (Cundeelee Dialect)
Vászolyi 1979 211 This variety of the Western Desert Language (Pama–
Nyungan family) is spoken in Cundeelee, located east of
Kalgoorlie and Perth, Western Australia. The latest
census reports a total number of 225 Wangkatja
(Wangkatha) speakers (ABS, 2016).
A Learner’s Guide to Warumungu
Evans 1982 77 This Desert Nyungic language (Pama–Nyungan family)
is traditionally spoken in and around Tennant Creek in
the Northern Territory. By the time when the learner’s
guide was published, there were about 400 speakers
(Evans, 1982, p. 2). The number of 321 native speakers
is reported in the latest census (ABS, 2016).
A Learner’s Guide to Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara
Goddard 1993 48 These two regional varieties of the Western Desert
Language (Pama–Nyungan family) are mutually
intelligible, named after the respective term for
‘coming/going’ (Goddard, 1993, p. 2). The language is
traditionally spoken in the northwest of South Australia,
with Pitjantjatjara east of Yankunytjatjara. About 3,125
native Pitjantjatjara speakers and 420 native
Yankunytjatjara speakers are reported in the latest census
(ABS, 2016).
A Learner’s Guide to Warlpiri: Wangkamirlipa Warlpirilki
Laughren,
Hoogenraad,
Hale,
& Granites
1996 218 This Ngarrkic language (Pama–Nyungan family) is
spoken in the region to the northwest of Alice Springs
and east of the border of the Northern Territory and
Western Australia. It is one of the largest Australian
Indigenous languages in terms of its current number of
21
speakers at around 2,304 (ABS, 2016). By the end of last
century, there were estimated at least another 1,000
second-language speakers of Warlpiri (Laughren et al.,
1996, p. 1).
A Learner’s Guide to Basic Wambaya
Nordlinger 1998 56 This West Barkly language (Mirndi family) is
traditionally spoken around the areas of Brunette Downs
Station and Anthony Lagoon Station in the Northern
Territory. By the time when the learner’s guide was
written, there were about 10 to 15 fluent speakers
(Nordlinger, 1998, p. 1). The latest census reports a total
number of 61 speaking Wambaya at home (ABS, 2016).
A Learner’s Guide to Kaytetye
Turpin 2000 184 This Arandic language (Pama–Nyungan family) is
traditionally spoken around the region 300 kilometres
north of Alice Springs in the Northern Territory. By the
time when the learner’s guide was published, there were
about 250 speakers estimated (Turpin, 2000, p. 1). The
latest census reports a total number of 122 speaking
Kaytetye at home (ABS, 2016).
A Learner’s Guide to Warumungu: Mirlamirlajinjjiki Warumunguku Apparrka
Simpson 2002 198 (See the description of the Warumungu language for
Evans’s guide above)
A Learner’s Guide to Eastern and Central Arrernte: Revised Edition
Green 2005 97 These two dialects of Arrernte (Pama–Nyungan family)
are closely related despite local variation of
pronunciation and vocabulary. They are spoken in and
around Alice Springs in the Northern Territory. The
number of speakers of Eastern and Central Arrernte is
estimated to be about 1,500 to 2,000 (Green, 2005, p. 2);
the latest census only has the record of Eastern Arrernte
with 385 speakers (ABS, 2016).
22
Kulurdu Marni Ngathaitya! Sounds Good to Me! A Kaurna Learner’s Guide
Amery &
Simpson
2013 229 This Thura-Yura language (Pama–Nyungan family) is
traditionally spoken on the Adelaide Plains in South
Australia, ranging from Crystal Brook and Clare to Cape
Jervis (Amery & Simpson, 2013, p. 3). Kaurna once
ceased to be spoken in the 19th century but started on its
revival in 1990 (Amery, 2018). Now, Kaurna is being
taught in schools at all levels, and hopefully, the first
native Kaurna speakers in this century are emerging
(Amery & Simpson, 2013). The latest census reports a
total number of 53 speaking Kaurna at home (ABS,
2016).
4.1.2 Analytical approach
This study follows a coding scheme with eight principles to evaluate learner’s guides
for Australian Indigenous languages, with Tomlinson’s (2016) five principles for
developing language learning materials as the fundamental framework (i.e., Principles 1–5
in Table 2). Since the principles are established with the intention of matching learning
materials better with SLA theory, the application suits the goal of the present study to
contribute SLA research findings to language revitalisation. Note that in Principle 1, the
feature of comprehensibility originally only focuses on the contents and tasks involved in
materials. In this study, this feature is supplemented by the comprehensibility of
metalanguage (see Kane, 1998), responding to field researchers’ concerns about existing
learning materials for Indigenous languages (de Reuse, 1997; Rice, 2006; Stebbins et al.,
2018: Warner et al., 2018).
To further complement Tomlinson’s (2016) principles targeting instructed learning,
the coding scheme includes the two distinctive features that Tomlinson (2010, 2011)
suggests for self-guided learning materials, namely, being open-ended (Principle 6) and
23
text-driven (Principle 7). The nature of learner’s guides as a medium for uninstructed
(re)learning can thus be more specifically examined. Additionally, considering the cultural
appropriateness of developing learner’s guides on the basis of Indigenous worldviews and
cultural values (Christie, 2017; Siekmann et al., 2017), the coding scheme incorporates the
Douglas Fir Group’s (2016) framework. Specifically, since Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011,
2016) principles represent more of the micro and meso levels of language learning in
social contexts, the macro level of ideological structure is particularly addressed and set as
the last principle (Principle 8).
With the coding scheme, every learner’s guide was closely examined and described.
Examples from the guides for the features were identified and further linked to the
interview data where appropriate.
Table 2 Coding scheme for evaluating learner’s guides
Principle Feature Operationalisation
1 Rich Is there rich input of language in use?
Whether examples reflect contextualised language;
Number of examples for each structure;
Whether audio input is available
Re-cycled Are there repetitive language models?
Whether a structure occurs only in a single instance
or reoccurs in multiple instances throughout the
learner’s guide;
If contextualised texts are available: Whether
structure is modelled repetitively in a text
Meaningful Does the content reflect real-world language in use?
Are the given materials related to learners’ life?
Type of content, e.g., general activities, specific
events and/or for specific purposes;
Whether the content is culturally specific and
relevant to the traditional lifestyle;
24
Whether the contemporary lifestyle is referenced;
Whether the sources are from native speakers and/or
the community
Comprehensible Is the content of language in use comprehensible for
learners?
Level of difficulty and complexity;
Whether examples are enough to demonstrate
structure;
Whether word-for-word glosses are provided
Is there substantial use of terminology? Are the
disciplinary terms clearly explained?
Whether assumed metalinguistic knowledge is
referred to;
Whether supplementary techniques (e.g., glossary,
graphs and audio input) are adopted to enhance
the comprehensibility of jargon;
Whether the metalanguage addresses users and
draws their attention to the more complex content
2 Affectively
engaging
Is the content able to arouse emotions, e.g., being
amused, excited, sad or sympathetic?
Whether contextualised examples are provided;
Whether culturally relevant materials are provided;
Whether the metalanguage addresses users;
Whether supplementary techniques (e.g., activities
and illustrations) are adopted
3 Cognitively
engaging
Are the tasks in the material achievable?
Whether the guide is task-based;
Level of difficulty and complexity;
Whether the guide is developed in a staged sequence
Are the tasks challenging? Do they require high-level,
critical and creative thinking?
25
Types of the tasks provided, e.g., drill-and-practice,
translation and communicative tasks;
Level of difficulty and complexity
4 Addressing
learners’ attention
to form whilst or
after focusing on
meaning
Is there explicit teaching of structure emerging from a
given meaning-based text/activity?
Sequential organisation of the guide;
Whether and how summary tables and/or block
notes are provided
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
Are there plenty of communicative practising tasks?
Number of communicative tasks provided;
Whether explicit instructions are given to practise
with native speakers or other learners
If yes, what are the communicative activities?
6 Open-ended Are there multiple modelling answers for each
practising item?
Types of the tasks provided (linked to Principle 3);
Types of answers, e.g., fixed answers, answer sets or
no answers given
7 Text-driven Is the content rooted in authentic texts?
Whether contextualised texts are provided and
designed as the start point of learning
8 Culturally
appropriate
Is the content constructed within and referring to the
belief system and cultural values of the speech
community?
Types of chapter/section division, e.g., based on
grammatical features or topics;
Whether the traditional worldview and cultural
values are acknowledged and referenced
4.1.3 Analytical procedures
Starting with Principle 1, I first identified whether contextualised language was
provided in each guide. If there are only or mostly out-of-context examples in a guide, the
26
content was examined as to whether it demonstrated common and/or situational usage that
reflected real-world language. Guides with contextualised texts and/or more than four
phrasal or sentential examples for each structure were considered to provide fairly ‘rich’
input (e.g., Amery & Simpson, 2013). When several examples for each structure are
provided and structures are modelled recurringly in texts, the guide was assessed as having
‘re-cycled’ materials (e.g., Vászolyi, 1979). To pass for being ‘meaningful,’ a guide is
expected to include content relevant to users’ life (e.g., Turpin, 2000, referencing both the
traditional and contemporary lifestyles). Learner’s guides, such as Vászolyi’s (1979), are
also regarded as meaningful because they include authentic content made by community
members. The ‘comprehensible’ feature is divided into two subsets, including
comprehensibility of content and that of metalanguage. For the former, when a guide is
developed for beginners or provides examples conveying basic meanings, the guide is
considered comprehensible (e.g., Laughren et al., 1996, based on a tape course for
beginners). As for the latter, I marked a guide comprehensible when disciplinary terms
were replaced with plain English (e.g., Nordlinger, 1998, p. iii, stating imperative as “to
tell someone to do something”) or when terms were used but clearly explained (e.g.,
Simpson, 2002). In addition to metalanguage, I also searched for supplementary
techniques for enhancing comprehensibility, such as graphs or notes. When examining the
guides with Principle 2, for those without much contextualised language, I evaluated them
as having minimal potentiality to arouse emotions and to affectively engage users (e.g.,
Evans, 1982). In comparison, guides containing culturally specific examples may be found
relatable by Indigenous users. If a user does not perform traditional practice anymore, a
sense of nostalgia or homesickness may be aroused (e.g., Green, 2005). On the other hand,
I also considered it affectively engaging where the metalanguage directly addresses users
27
and draws from their learning experience, and where supplementary techniques such as
illustrations are adopted (e.g., Turpin, 2000, with comics).
Principles 3, 5, and 6 are dependent and were examined consecutively. Firstly, I
identified whether a guide is task-based and if yes, what types of tasks are utilised.
Generally, tasks like listen-and-repeat, fill-in-the-gap, and translation are considered
achievable because language models are provided prior to the tasks, but among the three
types of tasks, only translation requires higher-level thinking because users need to be able
to analyse structure and produce language that is not modelled word-for-word previously.
To translate from English into the target language (e.g., Nordlinger, 1998) is more
challenging than the other way around (e.g., Laughren et al., 1996). Creative thinking,
however, is assessed as absent. The available fill-in-the-gap and translation tasks are only
for the purpose of practising vocabulary and grammar, and their de-contextualised nature
fails to facilitate communicative skills (Carreres & Noriega-Sánchez, 2011; Laufer &
Girsai, 2008). In comparison, I evaluated communicative tasks as the most cognitively
challenging type since it involves more linguistic skills, including vocabulary, grammar,
and interactive skills (e.g., Amery & Simpson, 2013, including role plays and map games;
linked to Principle 5). As for Principle 6, in cases where no tasks are designed (e.g.,
Goddard, 1993) and where tasks require either right or wrong answers, this principle is not
applicable. Where applicable, I also regarded situations where no answers were given for
communicative tasks as open-ended (e.g., Simpson, 2002). I did not, however, consider it
open-ended when no answers were given for translation tasks because there are no
alternative models available other than previously given examples (e.g., Vászolyi, 1979).
The next step is to examine the sequential organisation of a guide (Principle 4) and
particularly, whether the teaching emerges from contextualised language (Principle 7).
The target feature would be a meaning-based text being placed at the start of a section,
28
modelling target structures, and being closely accompanied with the teaching of structures.
Lastly, to examine whether and how a learner’s guide meets Principle 8, I looked at both
the micro- and macro-level development of a guide. Specifically, at the micro level, I
searched for instances referring to the influence of culture on linguistic features and vice
versa (e.g., Simpson, 2002). Regarding the macro level, Amery & Simpson (2013) well
exemplifies a topical development constructed according to the target cultural values in
social relations, including chapters themed around talking to different interlocutors. For
other guides without prominent reflection of cultural values in the materials development,
I nevertheless evaluated as culturally appropriate those acknowledging the worldview of
the target speech community (e.g., Goddard, 1993).
Full evaluations can be found in Appendix A: Materials Evaluation of Existing
Learner’s Guides. In the next chapter, I discuss these results in more detail.
4.2 Interviews
4.2.1 Participants
A total number of four participants were recruited for this study. They are
Documenting and Revitalising Indigenous Language (DRIL) trainers at the Resource
Network for Linguistic Diversity (RNLD). One of the trainers is a Yorta Yorta woman,
and the others are non-Aboriginal, including a male and two female participants. All the
participants have field and/or academic linguistics training backgrounds, and one of them
also hold a degree in applied linguistics. Except for one participant having worked as an
ESL teacher, the others’ language relevant work experiences are with Indigenous
communities and languages.
The Melbourne-based organisation, RNLD, works closely with Indigenous
communities across Australia. Their mission is to support linguistic diversity and
29
sustainability both nationwide and worldwide (Penfield & Tucker, 2011) by running DRIL
workshops with communities or with individuals to deliver training and transmit language
and linguistic skills required for maintaining and/or revitalising languages (Florey, 2018;
Gessner, Florey, Slaughter, & Hinton, 2018). As a former volunteer with RNLD, I learned
about an ongoing project the trainers have been working on, that is, to create a learner’s
guide template for Pama–Nyungan languages. With their experiences with communities
and learner’s guides in particular, the trainers are suitable candidates to respond to the
research questions. On the other hand, RNLD, as a hub connecting Indigenous
communities and language centres (Gessner et al., 2018) unaffiliated with any academic
institution, can be considered an appropriate “meeting point for academic linguists and
Indigenous communities” (Singer, 2018, p. 268). Being a safe place to address Indigenous
language materials, RNLD is further justified to be the site for participant recruitment.
4.2.2 Instruments
Semi-structured interviews were conducted based on sixteen pre-set questions (see
Appendix B: Interview Protocol). The interview questions focused on three main aspects:
the interviewees’ own experience using learner’s guides, their observation of Indigenous
communities’ or individuals’ experiences with learner’s guides, and their insights as
template developers. To collect data, the built-in application Voice Memos on iPhone XR
was utilised to audio-record the interviews. For data analysis, the recordings were
converted from M4A into WAV files with the audio editor software Audacity® 2.2.2
(2018). The annotation software ELAN 5.6-FX (2019) was later employed to transcribe
the recorded interviews.
30
4.2.3 Data collection procedures
An individual interview was conducted with each participant, and each lasted for
between forty minutes and one hour. To cater to the participants’ convenience and
preferences, two of the interviews took place in the RNLD offices, one in a quiet library
project room at the University of Melbourne, and one via online video call. Before the
interviews, the participants had received and approved the interview questions along with
a plain language statement explaining the study and details about participation. A consent
form was also signed by each participant prior to the individual interview. The interviews
were fully transcribed afterwards, and the contents were reviewed and approved by the
participants (see https://bit.ly/31CdLdd for Electronic Appendix: Interview Transcripts).
4.2.4 Analytical approach
A simple text analysis approach was adopted, and the coding of the interview data
was based on seven major themes, including:
• Current position of learner’s guides, i.e., how they are perceived and used by
community language workers;
• Pros of existing learner’s guides;
• Cons of existing learner’s guides;
• Community members’ learning needs;
• Community members’ reactions to existing learner’s guides;
• Suggestions of the reference group of the RNLD template;
• Suggestions of the interviewees based on their experiences working with
communities and notes for non-Indigenous developers
31
4.2.5 Ethical considerations
Potential risks of this study are minimal, and ethics approval was obtained from the
Faculty of Arts HEAG Human Ethics Advisory Group of the University of Melbourne
prior to the start of data collection (ethics ID number: 1953988).
32
Chapter 5: Results
In this chapter, the findings of the interviews with community linguists and of the
materials evaluation are presented in two consecutive sections.
5.1 Materials evaluation
5.1.1 Common characteristics of the evaluated learner’s guides
From the data analysis, the nine learner’s guides are found to share seven major
characteristics. First, they are generally developed in a grammar-oriented structure where
the chapters are organised according to grammatical features. An exception is Amery and
Simpson’s (2013) Kaurna guide, where they separate theme-based materials from the
grammatical description. The grammar-oriented characteristic is not described in the
coding scheme but, from my observation, is very different from ESL pedagogical
materials.
Second, they are considered comprehensible when examined with Principle 1 in
terms of content. Specifically, all of the learner’s guides are designed for beginners and
positioned as a tool to equip learners with basic abilities to advance their learning beyond
the guides. The guides therefore only introduce simple grammatical structures and
recommend further readings such as descriptive grammars. In cases where slightly more
complex structures are covered, they are touched on either towards the later parts of a
guide or intermittently as side notes. An example is Turpin’s (2000) Kaytetye guide,
where she introduces basic demonstratives first in Lesson 2 and then advanced
demonstratives later in Lesson 6. As for the other aspect of comprehensibility,
metalanguage, although some of the guides may be more challenging to comprehend than
the others, every developer of the evaluated learner’s guides evidently makes efforts to
33
explain linguistic concepts in plain English and draws from users’ metalinguistic
knowledge of English. Many of the developers note in their books that they try to avoid
using jargon in order to make the materials accessible for self-guided learners without
linguistics training. In reality, some developers adopt jargon substantially and with
explanation, some mainly use disciplinary terms as section headings, and some largely
reduce the use of such terms and replace them with a plain definition. Distinctive
examples to address the comprehensibility of metalanguage are Simpson (2002) and
Amery and Simpson (2013), who particularly set out a separate section to define
terminology in detail. The underlying rationale, according to Amery and Simpson (2013),
is that understanding linguistic terminology is useful when learners are interested and
perhaps more advanced, but terminology should not be a primary concern of learners.
The third shared characteristic comes from the identical approach of affectively
engaging users (Principle 2) by directly addressing them as ‘you,’ navigating them through
the learning process, and where necessary, directing their attention to more difficult parts.
Encouraging language is commonly utilised, for example, to tell users not to worry about
not being able to learn something quickly. In Nordlinger’s (1998) Wambaya guide, she
especially draws from her own experience in learning the language, as in, “If you’re not
used to it, it is sometimes difficult to hear the difference between the d, n and l (well, it is
for me anyway!)” (p. 7). This kind of metalanguage can be a good technique to reduce the
possible off-putting effect when users encounter obstacles during the learning process.
Fourth, the developers of the evaluated guides all emphasise in one way or another
the importance of practising communicative skills with native speakers and/or fellow
learners. This characteristic aligns with the emphasis of Principle 5 on communicative
competence. However, whether the learner’s guides do provide relevant activities, as
Principle 5 suggests, to facilitate this purpose is presented in the next section.
34
The fifth shared characteristic is that the developers are also evidently aware of and
acknowledge the inextricability of language and culture and the significance of showing
respect to the worldview of the community where the target language belongs. This can
link to Principle 8 and again, the realisation of this ideology varies across the learner’s
guides, for which I provide more detailed findings in the next section.
As for the sixth characteristic, the contents of the nine learner’s guides are authentic
in the sense that they are based on previous documentation by field linguists, and most of
them are developed with the assistance of community members. For example, Vászolyi’s
(1979) Wangkatja guide comes with four audio cassettes made with two native Wangkatja
speakers (p. 18). The recordings include two narratives of them recounting incidents
interacting with some non-Indigenous people at Cundeelee Mission (pp. 180–186). Such
materials related to the community members’ life experiences can be considered to fulfil
the ‘meaningful’ feature of Principle1. It is also worth noting that most of the evaluated
learner’s guides (six out of nine) have such accompanying audio recordings, which
provides various degrees of ‘rich’ input of authentic language models.
Apart from the six positive characteristics, a major shared drawback of the nine
learner’s guides is that, when examined with Principle 6, they generally lack open-ended
answers to the given tasks (cf. that no answers given to communicative activities is
considered open-ended; see Section 4.1.3). This characteristic mainly results from the fact
that many of the available tasks in the guides require either right or wrong answers, such
as fill-in-the-gap activities. Translation tasks are also commonly seen, but they are
provided either with fixed answers or no answers at all.
5.1.2 Observed tendency towards alignment with SLA frameworks
From the examination of the differences among the learner’s guides, there is an
overall tendency that the more recent guides match better with the principles encompassed
35
in the coding scheme, including characteristics of multimedia techniques to enhance
comprehensibility, of meaning-based texts, of communicative tasks, and of cultural
relevance and appropriateness. To start with, in addition to the aforementioned techniques
of addressing comprehensibility (Principle 1), some of the recent guides further employ
graphs particularly to make the teaching of sound systems more understandable, including
those of Turpin (2000), Green (2005), and Amery and Simpson (2013). Specifically, with
graphs of the vocal tract demonstrating places and manners of articulation, users are likely
to have a better grasp of the phonetic and phonological terminology than with the analogy
drawn from English pronunciation.
Second, by applying Principle 1 as well, meaning-based texts are more frequently
found in the recent guides. Specifically, only two of the five guides published before 2000
provide a fair amount of such materials (i.e., Vászolyi, 1979; Laughren et al., 1996), as
opposed to all of the four learner’s guides published in the recent two decades (i.e.,
Turpin, 2000; Simpson, 2002; Green, 2005; Amery & Simpson, 2013). Additionally,
‘richer’ input indicates more ‘re-cycled’ language models available, such as the song in
Green’s (2005) repetitively modelling “Where are you from?” (pp. 92–93). These
materials are also closely related to the ‘affectively engaging’ feature of Principle 2;
Turpin’s (2000) comic illustrations are a good example making the learning fun and
amusing. The most common types of meaning-based texts are dialogues and lists of useful
phrases for various scenarios whereas fewer guides provide narratives. Among the
available texts, illustrations and song lyrics are the rarest, with the former type only
abundantly provided in Turpin’s (2000) and Amery and Simpson’s (2013) and the latter
minimally in Turpin’s (2000) and Green’s (2005).
Note that, among these guides with meaning-based texts, Turpin’s (2000) and
Amery and Simpson’s (2013) are especially text-driven materials, meeting Principle 7,
36
while in three of the rest, the texts are rather attached at the back of a lesson or the entire
guide than being the start point of learning (cf. the Warlpiri guide of Laughren et al.
(1996) is partially text-driven; see Appendix A). Further linked to Principle 4, only
Turpin’s (2000) Kaytetye guide is identified as meeting the principle. Specifically, each
lesson of the guide starts with a comic illustration and an accompanying audio-recorded
dialogue, followed by explanations on the modelled structure. Block notes and summary
tables are inserted intermittently where necessary to address learners’ attention to more
explicit teaching of form. In comparison, although Amery and Simpson’s (2013) Kaurna
guide is also largely driven by meaning-based texts and activities, the guide is divided into
two parts as described in the previous section. In this organisation, there is only the
process of addressing learners’ attention to form ‘after’ focusing on meaning, but the
‘whilst’ process is absent.
As for the third characteristic, communicative tasks are only designed in three of the
nine guides, including Nordlinger’s (1998), Simpson’s (2002), and Amery and Simpson’s
(2013); only one communicative task is spotted in Vászolyi’s (1979). The number of
communicative tasks appears to increase in the newer guides, showing a tendency towards
better alignment with Principle 5, which suggests plentiful opportunities for
communication. The increasing utilisation of communicative tasks also indicates that the
more recent guides match better with Principle 3 since communicative tasks require more
of high-level and creative thinking. In comparison, in the other guides with tasks available,
the more common type of task is translation of de-contextualised phrases, merely able to
reinforce vocabulary and grammatical knowledge (see Section 4.1.3).
Regarding the fourth characteristic, cultural relevance and appropriateness, although
the developers usually introduce the cultural values shared by the target speech
community at the beginning of their guide, plentiful reference to the traditional cultures in
37
the content is not commonly found in the earlier guides. For example, in Evans’ (1982)
and Goddard’s (1993), only a few instances referring to regional animals and cultural
items are in place. On the other hand, reference to the contemporary lifestyle is
increasingly evident in the newer ones as well. For example, Simpson (2002) includes
some examples regarding schools and shops whereas Amery and Simpson (2013) talk
about modern housing and technology. These observations indicate that the ‘meaningful’
feature of Principle 1 is better fulfilled in the newer guides where the contents relate with
users’ life experiences more closely. Among all, only the most recent guide, Amery and
Simpson’s (2013), profoundly reflects the cultural values in its overall construction and
meets the essence of Principle 8 by organising the guide according to topics such as
talking to the Elders versus to friends.
5.2 Interviews
5.2.1 Learning goals and needs of Indigenous users
From the interviewees’ firsthand community experiences, they observed varying
goals and needs with respect to language learning across communities and individuals,
depending on a range of factors from the language status of a community to the preferred
learning style of an individual. Despite the possible differences, the core purpose is for
self-empowering and identity by means of language learning, including achieving
communicative competence, learning about cultural knowledge, and acquiring accurate
pronunciation. To fulfil these goals, an essential need is to have access to comprehensible
learning materials.
The identified purposes and needs are found throughout the four interviews. When
the interviewees were asked about pertinent observations, one of the first things coming to
mind was that, generally speaking,
38
I think really, they want to just, um a lot of the time, you know, be able to have a
conversation, and- and so something that tells them how to have basic conversations
and- and build up from those conversations [is what communities essentially need].
(Parncutt4, lines 088–091, Interview 4)
The purpose of (re)learning one’s heritage language is usually not just limited to language
ability but is also about retrieving the “history and cultural knowledge” (Joachim, line 171,
Interview 3) embedded in the language. As the interviewees remarked, language and
culture are “so intertwined” (Parncutt, line 226, Interview 4) that they cannot be separated
when one tries to (re)learn language. A major goal is to find “[the] piece of the puzzle that
is missing” (Joachim, line 169, Interview 3), and ultimately, (re)learning the language is
about the completing of an individual’s or a community’s collective identity. Given the
significance of culture, learners usually wish to have cultural materials provided in
language resources. For example, Murphy recounted from an event she hosted on the topic
of learner’s guides,
somebody said to some Aboriginal people, you know, ‘What do you wish the
linguists would’ve done?’ And she said, ‘I wish they put songs in there.’ (lines 152–
153, Interview 1)
Yet, not every community or individual would feel comfortable about placing such
materials in a publication, depending on the community circumstances. As Joachim notes,
future learner’s guide developers should be aware that
There’s this fear of how it’s gonna be used and who’s gonna be using it, and you
know all of that kind of stuff. (lines 319–320, Interview 3)
4 Given the specificity of the participant recruitment, the participants gave consents to the identification of their identities; pseudonyms are thus not applied. They have also approved the direct quotes drawn from the interviews.
39
In addition to traditional culture, the interviewees noticed that some communities would
like to be able to talk about contemporary life, including “football and things around the
house and doing the laundry” and other topics as such that are covered in Amery and
Simpson’s (2013) Kaurna guide (Tanner, lines 856–858, Interview 2).
Regarding the learning of language per se, it was a consensus among the
interviewees that communities need accessible learning materials that start off simple
without excessive grammatical complexities and incomprehensible terminology. As a core
aspect of language, “pronunciation . . . for a lot of people, it’s a big thing” (Parncutt, line
96, Interview 4). For instance, Joachim pointed out that she aimed to pronounce the
sounds of her language Yorta Yorta as accurately as possible and to reduce the influence
of English pronunciation (lines 423–426, Interview 3). On the other hand, in terms of
grammar, community learners oftentimes want to have instructions on “what to do [and]
how to communicate,” as well as clear explanations on everything presented in a learner’s
guide (Murphy, lines 283–294, Interview 1). In order to learn how to structure and
produce sentences, Murphy observed that, in an early stage of learning,
people would really like examples of, you know, natural conversation and phrases
and so on, so that you can very early on master some sentence or some
conversational skill, without having to first read the whole noun’s chapter and then
the whole verb’s chapter so that you can put together a whole sentence. (lines 128–
133, Interview 1)
This observation reveals a certain mismatch between learners’ needs and the current state
of learner’s guides pointed out by Murphy, which is reported in detail in the following
section. Nevertheless, it is suggested by some of the interviewees that after the initial
effort of (re)learning a language, people would need more learning of grammar, as in
Parncutt’s experience working with an Aboriginal man, “he’s finding by learning more of
40
the grammatical stuff, then he can say more” (lines 628–629, Interview 4). It is usually
more so in a revitalisation situation where no fluent speakers are around that people need
grammatical knowledge “to know how they put those sentences together” (Murphy, line
600, Interview 1).
5.2.2 Issues with existing learner’s guides for users
Based on the interviewees’ experiences, two major issues with learner’s guides
emerge regarding comprehensibility and community involvement. Before introducing the
findings on the identified issues, I first noticed substantial variations among the learner’s
guides that the interviewees have seen and used. For instance,
Some of them are very um I guess they are very basic. They don’t go into a lot of
detail about the phonology or um explain in detail how the grammar works. Um it
might just have some example sentences, not even clear whether the- is the word
order flexible or not . . . and then on the other end of the scale, you got the ones that
are closer to academic grammars . . . I think . . . they’re much richer sources for
learners, but they’re also more intimidating and- and less transparent. (Tanner, lines
241–254, Interview 2)
There are also “ones that have lots of examples,” which “really helps people . . .
understand how those grammatical aspects work” (Tanner, lines 414–419, Interview 2),
and “some different ones that use conversation as the . . . basis, [such as] the Kaytetye one
[by Turpin (2000)] . . . and then bring words out of that” (Parncutt, lines 370–374,
Interview 4). Despite varying types, overall, “[learner’s guides] seem to be organised
around linguistic features or parts of speech rather than a more pedagogical approach”
(Murphy, lines 89–91, Interview 1). This grammar-oriented characteristic is found
distinctive from more commonly seen language learning materials by interviewees with
experiences in learning and/or teaching a major language (e.g., Russian ‘teach yourself’
41
guides, Tanner, Interview 2). According to Tanner, the foundational difference between
Australian language learner’s guides and materials for major languages
could be that mostly [learner’s guides are] written by linguists . . . whereas . . . if a
Spanish language guide is being written, that might be written by a native speaker of
Spanish who has a teaching background. (lines 132–139, Interview 2)
The disciplinary training of the developers of Australian learner’s guides, from Tanner’s
and Murphy’s observations, is key to the distinct position of the materials since
“[linguists] know how to analyse [language]” (Tanner, lines 521–522, Interview 2), but
“there’s a less specialty in language acquisition and language teaching” (Murphy, lines
506–507, Interview 1).
The backgrounds of material developers, identified as an influential factor in the
issue of comprehensibility, is related to the use of jargon in learner’s guides. According to
the interviewees, the incomprehensibility of jargon is a recurring obstacle in community
users’ learning, which can be “disempowering,” “insulting,” “frustrating,” “confusing,”
“intimidating” and “daunting” (adjectives occurring in Interviews 1, 2, and 4) for people
without linguistics training. To address this issue, the interviewees noticed that some guide
developers, as well as themselves when working on the learner’s guide template, do make
efforts to explain linguistic concepts in plain English. Yet, plain language can lead to
another problem, especially when clear explanation usually also “means [that] you have to
use a lot more words” (Murphy, line 721, Interview 1). For those who wish to (re)learn
their language, it is likely to end up that
people just look at all these texts, and . . . it’s such a put-off like uh so long . . .
something so text-heavy is- is just gonna be so daunting [as well]. (Parncutt, lines
472 –745, Interview 4)
42
Consequently, at DRIL workshops where trainers help communities search for language
information in their learner’s guides,
sometimes I’ll- I’ll see um Aboriginal people just flicking through things just like
that and they’re trying finding example sentences. (Parncutt, lines 384–386,
Interview 4)
Another controversy with the use of plain language comes from the way developers
describe sounds by drawing from learners’ phonological knowledge of English and “[get]
people to say approximate sounds, not the actual sounds . . . like the [first] ‘n’ in ‘onion.’”
From Parncutt’s experience, “that’s a different sound for most people” (lines 102–113,
Interview 4). Even though the general perception is that existing guides are still too
technical, Joachim did encounter “some [learner’s guides that] are really clear and . . .
written in a really nice way” (lines 032–033, Interview 3). It is also noted by Murphy that
even that very same resource with an organisation like RNLD or with a linguist
sitting down explaining to them, it can then become incredibly empowering for them
to actually understand what it means and realise, ‘Oh actually I do understand that.’
(lines 200–203, Interview 1).
Joachim’s and Murphy’s comments suggest that the metalanguage may not always be the
sole factor in the issue of comprehensibility. Other factors, such as the organisation of
learner’s guides and users’ educational backgrounds can also be relevant. Take Simpson’s
(2002) Warumungu guide for example, which “was something most people in the group
found accessible” (lines 077–078, Interview 2) already; “there’s still a barrier there to a lot
of community members” (line 420, Interview 4). Particularly,
if you look at the Warumungu guide and you read the first two chapters, you might
learn something about the sound system and something about the word order, but
43
you won- you wouldn’t be able to learn anything that you can use yet. (Tanner, lines
297–300, Interview 2)
This perceived barrier is commented on by some of the interviewees as a mismatch with
common language learning processes. On the other hand, the fact that the trainers having
used the guide had a different impression of the material from the community users
implies the effect of educational backgrounds on content comprehension. With formal
linguistics training background themselves, Tanner and Parncutt found the Warumungu
guide useful as a reference grammar. Parncutt further pointed out that how they considered
it “straightforward and simple” (line 419, Interview 4) was probably “from [an] . . .
educated . . . non-Indigenous perspective” (line 457, Interview 4). In comparison, let alone
linguistics training,
a lot of people trying to learn their language again haven’t gone through traditional
schooling system or- or, you know, don’t have a great education to begin with
(Parcutt, lines 422–424, Interview 4)
As for cultural appropriateness, the other major issue emerging from the interviews,
there is a perception that learner’s guides development lacks community involvement at
times. As Joachim explained,
I think learner’s guides are done very much by one person or a couple of people, and
it’s done in a way where some consultations happen within the community, but . . .
it’s not enough sometimes. (lines 232–234, Interview 3)
Regarding this, Parncutt also noticed that “some of the issues were not giving proper
acknowledgement to the speakers of the language or um the country where the language is
from” (lines 073–075, Interview 4). In addition, many of the learner’s guides and other
resources include originally Westernised concepts in the materials, such as time
expressions, which may require more effort from Indigenous users to understand the
44
content. This can especially be an issue in a revitalisation setting where “the language is
stuck in a time where it never evolved” (Joachim, line 097, Interview 3). Take Joachim’s
personal experience for example;
I get a bit sometimes- I don’t get confused but it’s just like it’s a bit more to take to .
. . comprehend how you’re gonna do that and how you’re gonna talk about that in- in
an Indigenous language, especially when it’s coming from English. (lines 107–110,
Interview 3)
5.2.3 Suggestions of community language workers
Throughout the interviews, the interviewees have suggested several points to
improve the current state of learner’s guides in regard to the macro structure of materials,
micro components in materials, and the process of materials development. Take the
learner’s guide template they are working on for example; the RNLD trainers and their
Aboriginal reference group came to an agreement on a guide combining a phrasebook in
the front and an introduction to grammar as the second part. They suggested that the first
part of a guide be arranged around topics relevant to learners’ life and that the (re)learning
be driven by texts such as conversations. Not only does this arrangement match better with
users’ learning needs, but it is also a means to make the guide more comprehensive and
cover more aspects of language and domains of language use. As Murphy described,
based on what I know now about wh- how people use [learner’s guides], having a
couple of chapters that are more phrasebook-like or more, you know, here’s how
you do a Welcome to Country in the language or here’s a conversation between a
mother and a child in the language. Um I think that sort of thing could help ’cause
it’s like whole language and people start to see the pattern in the language. (lines
135–140, Interview 1)
45
This arrangement is also comprehensive in the sense that “it’s catering to two different
groups of learning styles or people and . . . interests” (Joachim, lines 294–295, Interview
3), including those who only aim to know what to say and those who are also interested in
the underlying grammatical system. With grammar provided,
It’s just to spark that interest. Then people get more interested in linguistics and
want to learn more, and which makes them learn more about the language, which is
really nice. (Joachim, lines 291 –294, Interview 3)
As for micro material components, activities are recommended for users who prefer
learning through practice. With some practising tasks, it may “make it a learner’s guide
that you can actually use and learn from” (Joachim, lines 629–630, Interview 3). In
addition to the function of “reinforc[ing] the learning,” providing activities also “helps [a
learner’s guide] to engage people” (Parncutt, line 169, Interview 4). As Parncutt remarked,
the inclusion of activities, as well as illustrations and colours, can be an approach to
address the issue of text-heaviness (line 482, Interview 4). Regarding exercises, Tanner,
on the other hand, suggested that feedback be an important component to be included
because generally speaking, “[learners] need to know whether [they’re] on the right track
or not” (lines 463–464, Interview 2) even though it could be a challenge, especially
if it’s . . . a reclamation language, often whoever’s writing the guide would- won’t
necessarily know what- it might be impossible to say what is correct, what might be
a range of possible correct answers . . . so . . . maybe you have to invent a new kind
of standard or something. (line 456–461, Interview 2)
Another component that the interviewees considered helpful in facilitating language
learning is audio materials, especially for pronunciation.
Then people can be hearing at it [sic], and . . . if there’s audio of, you know, native
speakers, then that would be ideal. (Parncutt, lines 259 – 260, Interview 4)
46
However, the inclusion of audio recordings can raise several concerns according to the
interviewees. First, audio documentation of native speakers may not always be available in
revitalisation situations. Under such circumstances, if a guide developer would like to
build audio materials,
it’s tricky ’cause I think a lot of people are- um don’t wanna record themselves . . .
in case it’s not right . . . maybe I guess in that situation if they’re not quite sure is to
really get that kind of linguistic advice as to how the sounds would’ve been
pronounced would probably be um the best way to go about it. (Parncutt, lines 280–
284, Interview 4)
Second, to involve early documentation needs to be assessed with extra care
because . . . documentation done by certain people- you don’t know their agendas,
you know, of them wanting to document the language. You don’t know what their
past was . . . You need to understand . . . the relationship that the [community]
people had with these people going through their countries documenting them
because sometimes they have self-agendas that won’t necessarily [sic] in favour for
us. (Joachim, lines 448–469, Interview 3)
This advice puts an emphasis on cultural appropriateness in the process of learner’s guides
development which reoccurs frequently throughout the interviews. Similar to Joachim’s
stance that developers “can’t take past documentations as gospel sometimes” (line 443,
Interview 3), Tanner noted that developers, when including cultural materials, should
avoid “giv[ing] the impression . . . that culture equals authenticity” (lines 372–373,
Interview 2). Particularly in revitalisation situations where some cultural knowledge “is
lost to history” (line 353, Interview 2),
you can’t include a lot of cultural information that’s closely tied in with language
because it’s not- just doesn’t necessarily exist anymore . . . maybe then you have the
47
question of ‘Well, if I don’t follow this culture, then I’m not authentically speaking
the language,’ or . . . ‘If I don’t follow exactly how my ancestors did these things,
then is there something wrong with my Aboriginality or my sense of identity?’ . . .
So that can be a little bit dangerous maybe in some situations. (lines 359–370,
Interview 2)
The only way to address such complexity is to consult with communities, which is
highlighted by the interviewees because “it wouldn’t be a non-Aboriginal person deciding
what was culturally important or appropriate or publicly acknowledged” (Murphy, lines
167–168, Interview 1). For instance, in the RNLD learner’s guide template project, the
trainers with linguistics backgrounds
[have] been really guided by the reference group of Aboriginal people coming from
a few different reclamation languages . . . [for the RNLD trainers,] [their] job is just
to try to make what they want [the trainers] to make. (Murphy, lines 556–558,
Interview 1)
Ultimately, the goal is that learner’s guides “[are] written by communities” for themselves
(Joachim, lines 593–594, Interview 3). It is especially important that communities make
decisions for and on their own regarding their languages before things are to be put into a
guide or any publications. Speaking from Joachim’s own experience with Yorta Yorta,
some of the theories that have been written um are- don’t have enough evidence to
support that it’s actually a feature that actually happen in a language. It’s just the
theory. It’s only been recorded by one or two people, and . . . it’s a decision that
we’re gonna have to make as a language community. Like oh okay, do we use this
suffix? Are we agreeing to use this suffix? . . . was this suffix used in this way that's
been written? (lines 535–540, Interview 3)
48
As Joachim suggested, “coming from a revitalisation language, . . . [communities] should
be entitled to be able to evolve [their language] and learn it first” (lines 558–562,
Interview 3) through this process of decision making. Given constant language evolution,
consequently, there is always a need to have new editions of learner’s guides because
What’s in one publication necessarily isn’t what’s happening with the language right
now. You know, that publication could’ve been done ten years ago. This language’s
evolved in that time. There’s new words; there’s new language structures; there’s
new- everything. (Joachim, lines 207–212, Interview 3)
49
Chapter 6: Discussion
In this chapter, I draw from the literature review on Australian language
revitalisation and language learning materials in Chapters 2 and 3, along with the results in
Chapter 5, to discuss the three research questions set out for this study respectively.
6.1 Research question 1
There is an overall mismatch between the existing learner’s guides and users’
learning goals and needs, but more recent guides do evidently show increasing awareness
of and modification to address this issue. To answer this research question, I discuss the
following three keywords identified in Chapter 5 relevant to this topic: comprehensibility,
communicative competence, and cultural knowledge and identity.
First of all, the comprehensibility of learner’s guides is found to be one of the most
salient issues in the results. From the materials evaluation, the nine learner’s guides
present features that contribute to making the materials comprehensible, including the
utilisation of multimedia, explanations in plain English, and the focus on simple grammar.
Among the three features, multimedia materials particularly serve users’ needs. For
instance, audio materials available in most of the guides are a useful technique to
supplement the explanations of pronunciation (see Hickey & Stenson, 2016; Yeh, 2015).
When recorded narratives or conversations are available, it further “give[s] an insight into
fluent discourse, in a way that is now impossible to do with live speakers” (Sharpe, 1993,
p. 80). Some of the recent guides also provide graphs to demonstrate places and manners
of articulation to enhance comprehensibility. However, regarding the use of plain English,
the interviewed language workers and communities that they have worked with have a
different experience from the findings of the materials evaluation. The interviewees
commented that community users more often than not encounter barriers to access existing
50
learner’s guides and hold a general impression that the materials are either too technical,
corresponding to the observations of Rice (2006) and Stebbins et al. (2018), or too text-
heavy. This impression is related to the fact that learner’s guides are rarely developed by
experts with SLA backgrounds but by linguists who are trained in analysing languages and
oftentimes draw their disciplinary knowledge when developing language materials (see
also de Reuse, 1997; Warner et al., 2018). Yet, given the evident efforts that most
developers of the evaluated guides have made to explain linguistics concepts, the
mismatch appears to have more complexities to it than solely due to the use of jargon.
The focus on grammar can be one possible factor causing the barrier as Rice (2006)
suggests. More specifically, the grammar-oriented development of existing learner’s
guides does not align with SLA learners’ staged learning process (e.g., Council of Europe,
2001; Tomlinson & Masuhara, 2017), nor meets Indigenous people’s general learning
needs (i.e., being able to produce basic conversations at the start). Although some of the
guides do try to place more complicated structures towards the end of a section or the
book, with more elaboration on grammar than actual language use, learners usually end up
ignoring the overwhelming explanations and only searching for the limited number of
examples. To address this mismatch, Amery and Simpson’s (2013) distinctive model
where the syntactic system is described in the second part, preceded by theme- and task-
based materials, is considered a potential solution by the interviewees. Another crucial
factor of the perceived barrier to accessing learner’s guide suggested in the interviews is
the educational backgrounds of Indigenous users. As the findings show, many of the
community members do not attend standard schooling. This reveals an underlying
problem that learner’s guides are not designed well enough to serve this audience given
that linguistics is itself a complex full-fledged academic discipline. Applied linguists with
training in language acquisition should thus get involved in developing learner’s guides to
51
transform sophisticated disciplinary knowledge into accessible pedagogical materials,
alongside linguists with specialised knowledge of the target languages (see Penfield &
Tucker, 2011).
As for communicative competence, existing learner’s guides do not seem capable of
meeting this core learning goal and need of Indigenous users. Situated in the model of
Celce-Murcia et al. (1995), the evaluated guides mostly only address linguistic
competence and perhaps a bit of discourse (e.g., how to combine words into a phrase) and
actional competences. Yet, the coverage of sociolinguistic and strategic competences is
generally absent, with an exception in Amery and Simpson’s (2013) guide. Only a few of
the evaluated guides provide plentiful communicative tasks while in terms of available
meaning-based texts, situational phrases are more often found than conversations. Take
Evans’ (1982) guide for example; the phrases listed as useful for medical settings do not
inform how to appropriately arrange them into a full conversation. Similarly, in regard to
tasks, phrasal or sentential translation tasks are more common than communicative ones in
the evaluated guides. As Carreres and Noriega-Sánchez (2011) and Laufer and Girsai
(2008) suggest, the de-contextualised nature fails to facilitate communicative skills
overall. Despite the paucity of communicative tasks, the more recent guides evaluated in
this study show a tendency of increasing in the number of such tasks. Amery and
Simpson’s (2013) guide have a particularly wider variety, including role plays and map
games, compared to the other guides. The teaching of how to talk to different interlocutors
is, on the other hand, an evidence of addressing sociolinguistic competence as part of
global communicative ability. Note that, the more recent guides also have a greater
capacity to fulfil the need of talking about contemporary life as they include more relevant
references, being more meaningful for learners as well.
52
The third key aspect, cultural knowledge and identity, is an important component in
the context of (re)learning an Indigenous language, distinguishing from second language
learners of major languages (see Penfield & Tucker, 2011). In particular, “learning the
language is not the entire goal in itself, [but] it is a means to cultural revitalization”
(Warner et al., 2018, p. 221) and to identity construction (Sharpe, 1993; Simpson et al.,
2010; Walsh, 2014, 2018). The interviews in this present study show similar findings,
including the identity building and empowering effects the (re)learning process could
bring to Indigenous people and communities as a whole. From the materials evaluation,
the desire to retrieve cultural knowledge through (re)learning language may be possibly
achieved as some of the evaluated guides do include cultural information, such as kinship
systems, and a few of the guides do tap into how culture influences linguistic features and
vice versa. However, being non-Indigenous, I cannot assert to what extent existing
learner’s guides are able to fulfil this goal, as well as to further reach the ultimate purpose
of completing one’s identity (Joachim, Interview 3; Sharpe, 1993; Walsh, 2018). Speaking
from my observations from evaluating the nine learner’s guides, though, Amery and
Simpson’s (2013) guide appears to have greater potential to meet this need compared to
the others, with the evidence that it consists of community members’ and Elders’ relevant
experiences as part of the book.
6.2 Research question 2
From the findings of the materials evaluation and interviews, current frameworks in
SLA materials development are generally applicable in the Australian Indigenous context
whereas some aspects require adjustment in order to be culturally appropriate by
considering the status of revitalisation languages. The possible application of SLA theory
to learner’s guides development supports previous studies that recommend consultation
with SLA theory for developing Indigenous language learning materials (Hermes et al.,
53
2012; Penfield & Tucker, 2011; Warner et al., 2018; Yeh, 2015). To discuss the SLA
frameworks adopted in this present study in particular, Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011, 2016)
principles for developing self-access and classroom materials match Indigenous learners’
needs fairly well, including comprehensible content, achievable tasks, and plentiful
opportunities for communication. Principles that emphasise rich and meaningful input of
contextualised language and text-driven materials are especially informative and align
with Indigenous learner’s needs as discussed in the previous section. For example, from
the interviews, multiple rather than single instances of language modelling are what
community people would appreciate and what can help reinforce the learning of structure.
This finding is also in accordance with previous studies on Indigenous language materials
where language in use is highly valued (e.g., Amery & Gale, 2008; Christie, 2017; de
Reuse, 1997; Warner et al., 2018). Other features encompassed in Tomlinson’s (2016)
principles, such as being re-cycled, affectively engaging, and cognitively challenging, can
also inform learner’s guides how to better facilitate learning, which is discussed more in
detail in the next section.
Despite the overall applicability, two of the principles proposed by Tomlinson
(2010, 2011, 2016) adopted for materials evaluation in this present study may require
modifications or supplementary guidelines for Australian Indigenous language learner’s
guides. First, it is necessary to consider the comprehensibility of metalanguage when the
‘comprehensible’ feature of Tomlinson’s (2016) Principle 1 is applied. I made this
adjustment for the evaluation scheme in response to field researchers’ concerns about
existing Indigenous learning materials (de Reuse, 1997; Rice, 2006; Stebbins et al., 2018;
Warner et al., 2018), which is later found to be a major issue that community members
and language workers have identified (see Chapter 5). Second, the feature of open-ended
answers valued by Tomlinson (2010, 2011) for self-access learning materials may
54
encounter challenges in the Indigenous context. Specifically, since there are usually no
fluent speakers or sufficient documented resources available for a revitalisation language
(see also Oates, 1990; Singer, 2018), it may not be possible to provide a range of
modelling answers in a learner’s guide. However, learners may still need feedback; thus,
even a set answer provided for a task item would still be valuable. Regarding this issue, as
Tanner proposes, developers and community members would “have to invent a new kind
of standard” (line 461, Interview 2). In addition to Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011, 2016)
frameworks, the Douglas Fir Group’s (2016) framework is able to inform the significance
of constructing learner’s guides within or referring to cultural values of the community
where the target language belongs. The inclusion of this macro-level aspect in the coding
scheme supports the stances of Christie (2017) and Siekmann et al. (2017) that materials
for Indigenous languages should be developed on the basis of Indigenous worldviews. The
findings of this present study also show that cultural values are essential for Australian
Indigenous communities and that cultural knowledge is required by many communities in
learner’s guides.
There are however two particular differences found between the adopted SLA
frameworks and the interviews in this study that are worth discussing. First, different from
Tomlinson’s (2016) Principle 4, addressing learners’ “attention to form whilst or after
focusing on meaning” (p. 22), the Aboriginal reference group of the RNLD learner’s guide
template project decided on a material structure similar to Amery and Simpson’s (2013)
learner’s guide, combining a phrasebook and a reference grammar. In this organisation,
yet, the ‘whilst’ process is absent (see Section 5.1.2). Additionally, there is no apparent
connection between the meaning-based and grammar-oriented parts; users may thus need
to make some effort looking for the target structure modelled in a text in the first part. In
comparison, Turpin’s (2000) text-driven model matches Tomlinson’s (2016) guidelines
55
better, with the meaning-based and grammar materials tied to each other in every chapter.
If Amery and Simpson’s (2013) model is to be adopted, a possible improvement can be a
paralleled structure where the chapters in the two parts closely correspond to each other.
Second, while the inclusion of cultural materials can be meaningful for learners
(Tomlinson, 2016), it is not always suitable and should be done in consultation with
communities so as to achieve cultural appropriateness. Because of the worldview that a
language belongs to a particular area of land (Koch & Nordlinger, 2014; Rumsey, 1993;
Sutton, 1997), some communities may not feel comfortable with publishing such
information and running the risk of improper use by other people. Moreover, in the
Australian Indigenous context, cultural materials and early documentation do not
necessarily equal authenticity (Joachim, Interview 4; Tanner, Interview 2), which may
appear counterintuitive from an SLA perspective but is very important to be
acknowledged when it comes to developing learner’s guides. This finding presents an
insight into the complex colonial history of Australia and its consequences (e.g., McKay,
2008; Hobson, 2018). Given the complexity, decolonising linguistic practice as Leonard
(2018) and Stebbins et al. (2018) suggest should be complied with in developing learner’s
guides by ensuring community involvement and self-determination (Joachim, Interview
3). Amery and Gale’s (2008) claim to position “the original source materials, in the
absence of other information, [as] the ultimate authority” (p. 343) should thus be revised
subject to communities’ ideologies and needs.
6.3 Research question 3
To better achieve the pedagogical purpose (see Yeh, 2015), this present study
suggests that staged learning should be the fundamental structure, and that grammatical
lessons be rooted in and/or closely linked to meaning- and theme-based textual materials.
Specifically, it is found that learner’s guides should provide meaning-based texts at the
56
start of a learner’s guide or a lesson, supporting Tomlinson’s (2016) principles. The
findings of this study also suggest that a topical structure would better facilitate learning,
meet the learning needs, and reflect real-world language that are meaningful for learners,
rather than developed based on grammatical features (see Kane, 1998; Rice, 2006). As a
result, Turpin’s (2000) and Amery and Simpson’s (2013) text-driven guides can serve as
suitable models to be further developed upon to cater to different community needs.
Regarding how to better design a learner’s guide at the micro level, as discussed in the
previous section, learner-centred SLA materials development frameworks can be useful
references. For example, examined with Tomlinson’s (2016) Principle 2, techniques of
affective engagement available in existing learner’s guides are usually limited to directly
addressing users and drawing from their learning experience. If more activities, cultural
materials (e.g., songs, Murphy, Interview 1) and delightful illustrations (Parncutt,
Interview 4) are provided, learners would be less likely overwhelmed and discouraged by
excessive texts and grammatical complexities. To improve a learner’s guide by abiding
with this principle, multimodal and culturally relevant materials from, for instance, the
Living Archive of Aboriginal Languages (see Bow, Christie, & Devlin, 2014) can be a
good resource for learner’s guides development. On the other hand, to refer to the
‘cognitively challenging’ feature of Tomlinson’s (2016) Principle 3, existing learner’s
guides generally fail to provide tasks that require higher-level or critical thinking. This can
also be linked to Tomlinson’s (2016) Principle 5; if a greater variety of communicative
tasks are designed, the (re)learning of an Indigenous language can not only be more
engaging but more comprehensive, for it would require different aspects of language
competence.
Beyond learner’s guides per se, to improve the materials, the governing principle is
to have community consultation, involvement, and ideally, initiation throughout the
57
process of materials development. Since every Indigenous community or individual may
have different needs, it is necessary to conduct needs assessments before the development
of learner’s guides (see also Adley-SantaMaria, 1997; Malone, 2003; McCarty, 2018). As
Parncutt (Interview 4) and Warner et al. (2018) point out, a learner’s guide that may be
theoretically promising may not necessarily be as well received by the target audience.
This finding supports Yeh’s (2015) flow chart for developing her Hla’alua learner’s guide,
which proposes the investigation of ‘why,’ ‘who,’ ‘how,’ and ‘what’ at early development
stages. On the other hand, the significance of community consultation and involvement is
evidenced with the tendency that the newer learner’s guides evaluated in this present study
meet communities’ needs better. Specifically, some developers of the recent learner’s
guides have dedicated themselves greatly to the target language and community, such as
Amery and Simpson (2013, pp. xxxvii–xxxviii) to Kaurna and Turpin (2000) to Kaytetye
(Parcutt, Interview 4). In comparison, the developer of the first Warumungu guide, Evans
(1982), for example, had not had extensive experience and involvement with the
community when the book was published (R. Nordlinger, personal communication, April
30, 2019). This observation further supports Joachim’s (Interview 3) suggestion that new
editions always be required. With constant revision and needs assessment, developers can
have a better idea of how a learner’s guide can match learner’s needs and up-to-date
cultural values and resources. A good example is Green’s (2005) guide for Eastern and
Central Arrernte, where she revises her earlier edition published in 1994 and draws from
earlier learner’s guides like Goddard’s (1993). Simpson’s (2002) Warumungu guide
consults previous guides as well, including Evans’ (1982) for the same language and three
of the guides evaluated in this study. Eventually, according to the findings from the
interviews, the ideal form of learner’s guides development is that the materials are
initiated by Indigenous communities. This also entails that Indigenous communities can
58
regain self-determination regarding their languages, especially when the complicated
history of Australian Indigenous communities and languages cannot be ignored (Joachim,
Interview 3; Stebbins et al., 2018; see also Bischoff & Jany, 2018; Leonard, 2018, for
decolonisation). This may lead to a chicken and egg situation, as in, communities need to
understand their languages so that they can compile a good learner’s guide, and when
communities have a good learner’s guide, their (re)learning of languages can be better
facilitated. Albeit paradoxical, the process for communities to work through documented
materials and to make decisions regarding their languages is essential and meaningful
according to Joachim (Interview 3), similar to jessie little doe baird’s (McCarty, 2018) and
Amery and Buckskin’s (2012) experiences.
59
Chapter 7: Conclusion
7.1 Summary of the study
In response to Penfield and Tucker’s (2011) call for applied linguists with an
expertise in language acquisition to step into the area of materials development for
Indigenous languages, this present study aims to investigate the current state and possible
improvement of learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous languages. To this end, firstly,
I adopted the learner-centred SLA stance and interviewed four community-based language
workers having experiences with learner’s guides to identify the goals and needs of
Indigenous learners. Meanwhile, I evaluated nine existing learner’s guides published over
the past four decades with Tomlinson’s (2016) five principles outlined for SLA materials
development as the fundamental framework. Based on the literature review, the
framework was further modified and supplemented with Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011)
guidelines for self-access SLA materials and the Douglas Fir Group’s (2016) three-level
framework for language learning.
The findings show that there is an overall mismatch between existing learner’s
guides and the learning purposes of Indigenous communities. Comprehensibility of the
materials is the most salient issue, closely related to the academic training of material
developers, the grammar-oriented nature of materials, and the educational backgrounds of
learner’s guide users. Communicative competence, on the other hand, is a major learning
goal and need of Indigenous communities suggested by the interviews. Yet, from the
learner’s guides evaluation, it is found that existing guides are not usually designed to
meet this purpose due to the lack of communicative tasks. In addition, where appropriate,
cultural materials provided in existing learner’s guides do not often suffice, and, generally,
communities would prefer more cultural content. To improve the current state of learner’s
60
guides, this present study suggests that SLA theory has the capacity to inform future
development but requires modifications in order to achieve cultural appropriateness. In
brief, a topical and staged model that provides task- and meaning-based textual materials
is recommended. Beyond learner’s guides per se, needs assessments for community
learners are essential for the purpose of improving the pedagogical materials since every
Indigenous community and individual may have varying learning needs and available
resources. Eventually, the governing principle of future learner’s guides development is to
have community consultation, involvement, and ideally, initiation.
7.2 Recommendations for future learner’s guide development
To conclude the findings of this study, a list of recommendations for future
development is summarised as below:
• Process of development:
Needs assessment prior to the development;
Community involvement, consultation, and initiation;
Involvement of applied linguists and their expertise in language acquisition
alongside linguists with specialised knowledge in the target language;
• Macro material structure:
Staged structure;
Text-driven: Turpin’s (2000) model or Amery and Simpson’s (2013) model;
• Micro material components:
Meaning-based and cultural materials, e.g., conversations and songs;
Communicative tasks;
Multimedia materials, e.g., audio materials and illustrations;
61
• Materials evaluation: Adopting Tomlinson’s (2010, 2011, 2016) frameworks
Supplements: Comprehensibility of metalanguage; the macro-level cultural
values of the target language and its speech community;
Modifications: Open-ended answers being less feasible for revitalisation
languages; whether inclusion of cultural and/or documented materials is
appropriate and authentic being subject to each community
7.3 Implications
First, the findings of this study imply that there are universal learning needs among
learners regardless of broader contexts (e.g., for language revitalisation or for educational
motivation), such as communicative competence. In light of the universality, SLA theory
can be extended to self-directed learning materials for Indigenous languages, but
adjustment is required subject to cultural appropriateness. Second, this study contributes
some insights for materials development targeting a less studied audience in the field of
SLA, that is, Indigenous users wanting to (re)learn and revitalise their heritage languages.
This audience group who may not often have standard schooling experience also differs
from the better studied group of learners who are usually well-educated. Due to the
difference in educational backgrounds, for example, the comprehensibility of material
metalanguage is consequently recommended to be taken into consideration. Third, the
emphasis on community consultation, involvement and initiation of this study further
supports the significance of community-based approach for linguistic practice. It is
especially true for the Australian Indigenous context given the historical complexity.
62
7.4 Limitations and directions for future research
This study is a preliminary attempt to contribute some perspectives of SLA theory to
the development of learner’s guides for Australian Indigenous languages, and thus can
only touch on a broad discussion about the learning goals and needs of communities, as
well as an overview of the current state of learner’s guides. Therefore, further research and
needs assessments targeting specific communities and learner’s guides are required in
order to investigate how a guide should be exactly developed to cater to which kind of
learning purpose. Additionally, the interviewees recruited in this study are community-
based language workers with linguistics training backgrounds, which entails a possible
gap between the findings drawn from their observer’s perspective and the actual
experience of community users. Evaluation based on how materials are received by
Indigenous users of learner’s guides would be necessary.
To address some of the unresolved issues and challenges of this study, future studies
on how to best employ plain English and disciplinary terminology to explain linguistic
concepts are important. Furthermore, given the grammatical complexities of Australian
Indigenous languages as distinct from English, such as rich morphology (Yallop, 1982),
case stacking (Sadler & Nordlinger, 2006) and ergativity (Bittner & Hale, 1996), there is a
need to investigate how such complexities can be developed in a staged manner in order to
better align with learning process. With this future research, the field of SLA could be
enriched with more perspectives compared to the current English- or major languages-
centric focus.
63
References
Adley-SantaMaria, B. (1997). White Mountain Apache language: Issues in language shift,
textbook development, and native speaker-university collaboration. In J. Reyhner
(Ed.), Teaching Indigenous Languages: Selected papers from the Annual
Symposium on Stabilizing Indigenous languages (4th, Flagstaff, Arizona, May 1-3,
1997) (pp. 129–143). Flagstaff, AZ: North Arizona University.
Amery, R. (2018). Revitalization of Kaurna. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.),
The Routledge handbook of language revitalization (pp. 330–341). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Amery, R., & Buckskin, V. K. (2012). Handing on the teaching of Kaurna language to
Kaurna youth. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2, 31–41.
Amery, R., & Gale, M. (2008). But our language was just asleep: A history of language
revival in Australia. In W. B. McGregor (Ed.), Encountering Aboriginal
languages: Studies in the history of Australian linguistics (pp. 339–382). Canberra,
ACT: Australian National University.
Amery, R., & Simpson, J. (2013). Kulurdu marni ngathaitya! Sounds good to me! A
Kaurna learner’s guide. Adelaide, SA: Kaurna Warra Pintyanthi.
Anderson, G. D. S. (2011). Language Hotspots: What (applied) linguistics and education
should do about language endangerment in the twenty-first century. Language and
Education, 25(4), 273–289. doi:10.1080/09500782.2011.577218
Audacity® (Version 2.2.2) [Computer software]. (2018). Retrieved from
https://www.audacityteam.org/
Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS]. (2016). Census 2016, Language spoken at home by
sex (SA2+). Retrieved from http://stat.data.abs.gov.au/Index.aspx?DataSetCode
=ABS_C16_T09_SA
64
Bischoff, S. T., & Jany, C. (2018). Insights from practices in community-based research:
From theory to practice around the globe [electronic resource]. Berlin: De
Gruyter Mouton.
Bittner, M., & Hale, K. (1996). Ergativity: Toward a theory of a heterogeneous class.
Linguistic Inquiry, 27(4), 531–604.
Bow, C., Christie, M., & Devlin, B. (2014). Developing a living archive of Aboriginal
languages. Language Documentation and Conservation, 8, 345–360.
Carreres, Á., & Noriega-Sánchez, M. (2011). Translation in language teaching: Insights
from professional translator training. The Language Learning Journal, 39(3), 281–
297. doi:10.1080/09571736.2011.567356
Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1995). Communicative competence: A
pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied
Linguistics, 6(2), 5–35.
Chen, J., Wang, C., & Cai, J. (2010). Teaching and learning Chinese: Issues and
perspectives [electronic resource]. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Christie, M. (2017). Developing local curriculum materials—Learning metaphors,
insightful collaborations, community involvement. In B. C. Devlin, S. Disbray, &
N. R. F. Devlin (Eds.), History of bilingual education in the Northern Territory:
People, programs and policies [electronic resource] (pp. 127–139). Singapore:
Springer. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-2078-0_11
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65
Czaywoska-Higgins, E. (2009). Research models, community engagement, and linguistic
fieldwork: Reflections on working within Canadian Indigenous communities.
Language Documentation and Conservation, 3(1), 15–50.
De Reuse, W. J. (1997). Issues in Indigenous textbook development: The case of Western
Apache. In J. Reyhner (Ed.), Teaching Indigenous languages: Selected papers
from the Annual Symposium on Stabilizing Indigenous Languages (4th, Flagstaff,
Arizona, May 1-3, 1997) (pp. 116–128). Flagstaff, AZ: North Arizona University.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). Motivation. In The psychology of the language learner
revisited [electronic resource] (pp. 72–105). New York, NY: Routledge.
ELAN (Version 5.6-FX) [Computer software]. (2019). Nijmegen, the Netherlands: Max
Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, the Language Archive. Retrieved from
https://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/
Evans, N. (1982). A learner’s guide to Warumungu. Alice Springs, NT: Institute for
Aboriginal Development.
Florey, M. (2018). Transforming the landscape of language revitalization work in
Australia: The Documenting and Revitalizing Indigenous Languages training
model. In S. T. Bischoff & C. Jany (Eds.), Insights from practices in community-
based research: From theory to practice around the globe [electronic resource]
(pp. 314–337). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110527018-018
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language
learning. Rowley, MA: Newburry House.
Gessner, S., Florey, M., Slaughter, I. Y., & Hinton, L. (2018). The role of organizations in
language revitalization. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.), The Routledge
handbook of language revitalization (pp. 51–60). New York, NY: Routledge.
66
Goddard, C. (1993). A learner’s guide to Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara. Alice Springs,
NT: Institute for Aboriginal Development.
Green, J. (2005). A learner’s guide to Eastern and Central Arrernte: Revised edition.
Alice Springs, NT: IAD Press.
Hermes, M., Bang, M., & Marin, A. (2012). Designing Indigenous language revitalization.
Harvard Educational Review, 82(3), 381–438.
Hickey, T. M., & Stenson, N. (2016). One step forward and two steps back in teaching an
endangered language? Revitalising L2 reading in Irish. Language, Culture and
Curriculum, 29(3), 302–318. doi:10.1080/07908318.2016.1231200
Hobson, J. (2018). Language revival in Australia. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche
(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language revitalization (pp. 320–329). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.),
Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 53–73). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Kane, D. (1998). [Review of the book Teach yourself Cantonese: A complete course for
beginners, by H. Baker & P. K. Ho]. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African
Studies – University of London, 61, 381–382.
Koch, M., & Nordlinger, R. (2014). The languages of Australia in linguistic research:
Context and issues. In The languages and linguistics of Australia: A
comprehensive guide (pp. 3–21). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Key concepts in language learning and language education. In
J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 155–170).
Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
67
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Freeman, D. (2008). Language moves: The place of “foreign”
languages in classroom teaching and learning. Review of Research in Education,
32(1), 147–186.
Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary
learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29(4),
694–716. doi:10.1093/applin/amn018
Laughren, M., Hoogenraad, R., Hale, K., & Granites, R. J. (1996). A learner’s guide to
Warlpiri: Wangkamirlipa Warlpirilki. Alice Springs, NT: IAD Press.
Leonard, W. Y. (2018). Reflections on (de)colonialism in language documentation. In B.
McDonnell, A. L. Berez-Kroeker, & G. Holton (Eds.), Reflections on language
documentation: 20 years after Himmelmann 1998 [electronic resource] (pp. 55–
65). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Long, J. (2007). Barriyala let’s work: Gumbaynggirr language student workbook 1-3.
Nambucca Heads, NSW: Muurrbay Aboriginal Language and Culture Co-
operative.
Lutz, E. L. (2007, June). A language out of time. Cultural Survival Quarterly Magazine.
Retrieved from https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-
quarterly/language-out-time
Malone, D. L. (2003). Developing curriculum materials for endangered language
education: Lessons from the field. International Journal of Bilingual Education
and Bilingualsim, 6(5), 332–348. doi:10.1080/13670050308667790
Marmion, D., Obata, K., & Troy, J. (2014). Community, identity, wellbeing: The report of
the Second National Indigenous Languages Survey. Canberra, ACT: Australia
Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.
68
McCarty, T. L. (2018). Community-based language planning: Perspectives from
Indigenous language revitalization. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of language revitalization (pp. 22–35). New York, NY:
Routledge.
McKay, G. (2008). Language maintenance, shift – and planning. In G. Leitner & I. G.
Malcolm (Eds.), The habitat of Australia’s Aboriginal languages: Past, present
and future (pp. 101–130). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Nordlinger, R. (1998). A learner’s guide to basic Wambaya [electronic resource].
Unpublished manuscript.
Oates, L. F. (1990). Aboriginal recording of Aboriginal language. In P. Austin, R. M. W.
Dixon, T. Dutton, & I. White (Eds.), Language and history: Essays in honour of
Luise A. Hercus (pp. 221–232). Canberra, ACT: Pacific Linguistics.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning
Japanese. New York, NY: Routledge.
Penfield, S. D., & Tucker, B. V. (2011). From documenting to revitalizing an endangered
language: Where do applied linguists fit?. Language and Education, 25(4), 291–
305. doi:10.1080/09500782.2011.577219
Rice, K. (2006). Ethical issues in linguistic fieldwork: An overview. Journal of Academic
Ethics, 4(1–4), 123–155. doi:10.1007/s10805-006-9016-2
Rice, K. (2018). Collaborative research: Visions and realities. In S. T. Bischoff & C. Jany
(Eds.), Insights from practices in community-based research: From theory to
practice around the globe [electronic resource] (pp. 13–37). Berlin: De Gruyter
Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110527018-002
69
Rumsey, A. (1993). Language and territoriality in Aboriginal Australia. In M. Walsh & C.
Yallop (Eds.), Language and culture in Aboriginal Australia (pp. 191–206).
Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Sadler, L., & Nordlinger, R. (2006). Case stacking in realizational morphology.
Linguistics, 44(3), 459–487. doi:10.1515/LING.2006.016
Sharpe, M. (1993). Bundjalung: Teaching a disappearing language. In M. Walsh & C.
Yallop (Eds.), Language and culture in Aboriginal Australia (pp. 73–84).
Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Siekmann, S., Webster, J. P., Samson, S. A., & Moses, C. K. (2017). Teaching our way of
life through our language: Materials development for Indigenous immersion
education. Cogent Education, 4(1362887), 1–13.
Simpson, J. (2002). A learner’s guide to Warumungu: Mirlamirlajinjjiki Warumunguku
apparrka. Alice Springs, NT: IAD Press.
Simpson, J., Caffery, J., & McConvell, P. (2010). Maintaining languages, maintaining
identities: What bilingual education offers. In B. Baker, I. Mushin, M. Harvey, &
R. Gardner (Eds.), Indigenous language and social identity: In honour of Michael
Walsh (pp. 385–404). Canberra, ACT: Pacific Linguistics.
Singer, R. (2018). Reflections on linguistic fieldwork in Australia. In B. McDonnell, A. L.
Berez-Kroeker, & G. Holton (Eds.), Reflections on language documentation: 20
years after Himmelmann 1998 [electronic resource] (pp. 267–275). Honolulu, HI:
University of Hawai‘i Press.
Stebbins, T. N., Eira, K., & Couzens, V. (2018). Decolonising linguistic practice. In Living
languages and new approaches to language revitalisation research (pp. 37–62).
New York, NY: Routledge.
70
Sutton, P. (1997). Materialism, sacred myth and pluralism: Competing theories of the
original of Australian languages. In F. Merlan, J. Morton, & A. Rumsey (Eds.),
Scholar and sceptic: Australian Aboriginal studies in honour of L. R. Hiatt (pp.
211–242). Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
The Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual
world. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1 [Supplement]), 19–47.
doi:10.1111/modl.12301
Tomlinson, B. (2010). Principles and procedures for self-access materials. Studies in Self-
Access Learning Journal, 1(2), 72–86.
Tomlinson, B. (2011). Access-self materials. In Materials development in language
teaching [electronic resource] (pp. 414–432).
Tomlinson, B. (2016). Achieving a match between SLA theory and materials
development. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), SLA research and materials development for
language learning [electronic resource] (pp.17–37). New York, NY: Routledge.
Tomlinson, B., & Masuhara, H. (2017). The complete guide to the theory and practice of
materials development for language learning [electronic resource]. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley Blackwell.
Turpin, M. (2000). A learner’s guide to Kaytetye. Alice Springs, NT: IAD Press.
Vászolyi, E. G. (1979). Teach yourself Wangkatja: An introduction to the Western Desert
Language (Cundeelee dialect). Perth, WA: Mount Lawley College.
Walsh, M. (1993). Languages and their status in Aboriginal Australia. In M. Walsh & C.
Yallop (Eds.), Language and culture in Aboriginal Australia (pp. 1–13). Canberra,
ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
71
Walsh, M. (2014). Indigenous language maintenance and revitalisation. In M. Koch & R.
Nordlinger (Eds.), The languages and linguistics of Australia: A comprehensive
guide (pp. 329–362). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Walsh, M. (2018). “Language is like food . . .”: Links between language revitalization and
health and well-being. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.), The Routledge
handbook of language revitalization (pp. 5–12). New York, NY: Routledge.
Warner, N., Geary, Q., & Butler, L. (2018). Creating learning materials and teaching
materials for language revitalization: The case of Mutsun. In S. T. Bischoff & C.
Jany (Eds.), Insights from practices in community-based research: From theory to
practice around the globe [electronic resource] (pp. 212–227). Berlin: De Gruyter
Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110527018-012
Yallop, C. (1982). Affixes and their functions. In Australian Aboriginal languages (pp.
72–120). London: Andre Deutsch.
Yeh, L.-C. (2015). Developing a Hla’alua learner’s guide: In search of an auxiliary
remedy for Hla’alua revitalization (exegesis) and a Hla’alua learner’s guide
(creative component) (master’s thesis). The Australian National University,
Canberra, ACT, Australia.
72
Appendix A: Materials Evaluation of Existing Learner’s Guides
Vászolyi (1979)
Teach Yourself Wangkatja: An Introduction to the Western Desert Language (Cundeelee Dialect)
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich A fair amount of language in use is provided. Although most of the
examples provided are phrases or sentences out of context, they
demonstrate common usage. Towards the end of the learner’s guide, there
are a short and a long narrative, providing input of contextualised language.
On the other hand, this learner’s guide is developed as a “talking book”
(Vászolyi, 1979, p. 17), based on tape recordings by Brian and Dawn
Hadfield, Jerome Anderson and John Brown (p. 18); the tapes and the
guide come as a kit. The cassette tapes provide rich audio input
demonstrating real-world language.
Pp. 180–186, narratives (with
translation on pp. 186–191).
Re-cycled A fair amount of repetitive language modelling is available., including
several examples for each structure (with the supplementary “grammar
drill” sections) and reoccurred structures modelled in the narratives on pp.
180–186. There are also explicit instructions guiding learners to revisit
previous content.
P. 36: “Listen, listen, mimic
promptly and listen again to
each item as many times as
necessary.”
73
Meaningful Although the contents include more of single phrasal or sentential
examples, instances of contextualised language are evident, including the
narratives on pp. 180–186 (incidents interacting with non-Indigenous
people at Cundeelee Mission). In addition, the cassette tapes per se are
authentic, for two of the developers (or informants according to the guide),
Anderson and Brown, are native Wangkatja speakers (Vászolyi, 1979, p.
18).
Overall, the content is based on general activities that are roughly related to
learners’ life, with a few instances focusing on specific events. Few
examples are culturally specific and relevant to the traditional lifestyle,
referencing the kangaroo, boomerangs, and so on.
Pp. 130–131, on how to make
polite implication; p. 114: “The
witchdoctor is listening to the
man (hears the man).”
Comprehensible The content is assumed to be comprehensible for learners since Vászolyi
consciously set out “detailed explanation of the problems arising from the
units” and plentiful exercises and tables “to assist comprehension and
reinforcement” (p. 19). The phrasal and sentential examples provided also
convey general and basic meanings.
Phonetics and phonology: The use of disciplinary terms is minimal, and
concepts are explained in detail with plain English. The assumed phonetic
and phonological knowledge of English of users are also utilised as a tool
for explanation. Cassette tapes are provided to demonstrate pronunciation,
enhancing the comprehensibility of the metalanguage.
P 28: “a tiny puff of air,
technically termed
‘aspiration’”; p. 85, on
affirmative and interrogative:
“In English, . . . As you will
74
Grammar: The use of jargon is minimal. The concepts are clearly
explained and demonstrated with plain language, examples and assumed
English knowledge. According to Vászolyi, this learner’s guide is written
in a way that is “intelligible without any previous training in linguistics” (p.
17) and “self-explanatory as far as possible” (p. 18) because chances are
learners may not have access to native speakers’ assistance. Thus,
“everything has been explained at length and without employing technical
terms common in linguistics but cryptic to the non-linguist” (p. 19).
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
have noticed, in Wangkatja . .
.”
2 Affectively
engaging
Since most of the examples are out of context, the content appears unlikely
to arouse emotions. If any, the few instances of culturally specific examples
and the narratives by Anderson and Brown may be found relatable by
Indigenous users, or if an Indigenous user does not perform traditional
cultural practices anymore, such examples may arouse a sense of nostalgia.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
their learning experience.
P. 21: “For a start, you will . . .
Get your tape . . . you are
expected to hear . . . Off we go,
then.”
3 Cognitively
engaging
The major type of tasks is translation (Wangkatja into English and English
into Wangkatja). These tasks are supposed to be achievable since the target
structure and vocabulary are already modelled prior to the tasks.
Pp. 124–126, 16 exercise sets
for Unit 22 on verbless
sentences, a possessive marker,
75
demonstratives, derivative
suffixes and negation.
Translation tasks require certain levels of high-level and creative thinking,
especially when learners are to translate English sentences into Wangkatja,
since exercise items are not modelled word-for-word previously; only the
structure and vocabulary that may be useful are provided.
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure. Although there
are meaning-based texts and activities available, they are rather
supplemented after the teaching of structure in each unit and attached
towards the end of the guide (narratives on pp. 180–186). Sections titled
“points of interest” are usually inserted after “grammar drill” sections
(phrasal or sentential modelling of structure) to address learners’ attention
to further information.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There are no communicative practising tasks provided in this learner’s
guide, except for one instance where Vászolyi suggests a potential
communicative practice (p. 48).
The suggested communicative practice is potentially a role-play of giving
commands and responses.
P. 48: “If you have a native
Wangkatja speaker to assist
you or a partner also learning
76
Wangkatja, you might
improvise a little play . . .”
6 Open-ended There are no multiple modelling answers provided for practising items, nor
any answers provided for the exercises in this learner’s guide. For the given
translation tasks in particular, although learners will thus need to figure out
the answers on their own by exploring through the materials available
throughout the learner’s guide (this feature, linked to Principle 3, is
challenging and requires high-level cognitive skills), there are no
alternative models available.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is not driven by texts but by the grammar. The
authentic texts available (i.e., narratives on pp. 180–186) are attached
towards the end of the guide but not the start point or source of learning.
8 Culturally
appropriate
Overall, the contents do not explicitly reflect the cultural values of the
Wangkatja speech community, but few instances do briefly reference the
socio-cultural aspect of linguistic features of the language.
Pp. 130–131, on implicature; p.
142, on compulsive vs. polite
commands.
77
Evans (1982)
A Learner’s Guide to Warumungu
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich Not much of language in use is provided. Single phrasal or sentential
examples out of context are in place instead.
Pp. 16–17, on the dative case,
e.g., “This is good for pain”
and “for a woman.”
Re-cycled Only minimal repetitive language models are available. There are usually
only a few phrasal or sentential examples for each structure. Each instance
of modelling also only occurs once throughout the whole guide, instead of
repeating over and over after its first occurrence.
Meaningful The contents include more of single phrasal or sentential examples similar
to those found in descriptive grammars rather than contextualised language
in use. The examples in this learner’s guides are authentic in a sense that
they are collected from native speakers by field linguists (p. 2).
Overall, the content is based on general activities that are roughly related to
learners’ life, but not focusing on specific daily events such as greeting or
doing everyday chores. Yet, Appendix 2 provides a short list of 34 useful
phrases specifically for medical settings. Few examples are culturally
specific and relevant to the traditional lifestyle, referencing the kangaroo,
the possum, spears and boomerangs.
Few examples on pp. 22, 23,
34, 35 & 46 refer to culturally
relevant events; Appendix 2 (p.
77).
78
Comprehensible While not much of input of language in use is provided, the phrasal and
sentential examples are presumably comprehensible because of the rather
general and basic meanings they convey. In addition, all examples are
given glosses with word-for-word translation and syntactic information.
However, since there are only minimal examples for each structure,
whether the actual realisation of the structures is adequately
comprehensible can be in question.
Phonetics and phonology: Disciplinary terms are used moderately and
with plain explanation. The assumed phonetic and phonological knowledge
of English of users are also utilised as a tool to explain jargon.
Grammar: Jargon is mainly used as chapter or section titles. The concepts
are clearly explained and demonstrated with plain language, examples and
assumed English knowledge.
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
P. 6, on lamino-palatal sounds;
p. 25, introduction to tense and
mood.
Para 2, p. 5, “You have already
met another ‘retroflex’ sound
which is very easy for English
speakers”; para 5, p. 5,
“Another sound that may cause
problems is ng [voiced velar
nasal].”
2 Affectively
engaging
Since the examples are out of context, the content appears unlikely to
arouse emotions. If any, the few instances of culturally specific examples
may be found relatable by Indigenous users, or if an Indigenous user does
P. 52, e.g., “They (two) are
hitting each other with
boomerangs”; “A big mob of
them (they) are fighting, hitting
79
not perform traditional cultural practices anymore, such examples may
arouse a sense of nostalgia.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
their learning experience.
one another”; pp. 18–21, on
transitivity and ergativity, e.g.,
“You may be wondering how
you’ll ever learn all these
different forms” (p. 19).
3 Cognitively
engaging
This learner’s guide is not task-based but rather a simplified descriptive
grammar. The content, on the other hand, is assumed to be achievable when
learners are engaged because the guide is roughly designed in a graded
sequence (Evans, 1982, p. 3). Evans suggested that, while the later chapters
are more difficult, learners should be able to gradually learn more and more
if they are dedicated to constantly returning to the more challenging parts.
While not being task-based, the content is challenging to some extent, for
example, “Warumungu has many sounds that can be quite difficult for an
English speaker” (p. 4). Yet, the requirement for critical and creative
thinking abilities is not prominent.
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure; there is no
meaning-based text or activity available. As Evans stated, a major purpose
of this guide is to “[explain] the ‘grammar’ as clearly as possible” (p. 2).
The tables attached in the appendix showcase a clear demonstration and
summary for some of the important structures taught in the guide.
Appendix 1 (pp. 68–76).
80
focusing on
meaning
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There are almost no communicative practising tasks provided in the
learner’s guide because Evans did not position it as a self-learning material.
Rather, as Evans explained, the guide aims at learners living among fluent
speakers. An exception is found at the end of the chapter on phonetics and
phonology; a brief section of “practice expressions” is designed, listing 17
basic phrases that may be useful for communicative purposes. Despite the
lack of practices available in this guide, learners are explicitly advised to
practise the language with native Warumungu speakers (Evans, 1982, p. 2).
P. 8, practices on
pronunciation, e.g., “Are you
well?”, “I don’t know.”
This feature is not applicable.
6 Open-ended There are only two practices found in this learner’s guide for understanding
meanings of different structures. Due to the nature of the practices, there
are only fixed answer sets provided instead of multiple modelling answers.
P. 64, on switch-reference, and
p. 66, on relative clauses;
answers on p. 67.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is not driven by texts but by the grammar. It is
explained by Evans in the first chapter where how to use the guide is
introduced by noting that there are no “stories, and not much on idioms or
customs” (Evans, 1982, p. 2).
8 Culturally
appropriate
Overall, the contents do not explicitly reflect the cultural values of the
Warumungu speech community.
81
Goddard (1993)
A Learner’s Guide to Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich Not much of language in use is provided. Single sentential examples out of
context are in place instead.
P. 30, on circumstantial
clauses: “We went home on
foot, because the car broke
down.”
Re-cycled Only minimal repetitive language models are available. There are usually
only one or two sentential examples for each structure. Each instance of
modelling also only occurs once throughout the whole guide, instead of
repeating over and over after its first occurrence.
P. 26, on serial constructions
(combination activities), with
four examples (60–63).
Meaningful The contents include more of single sentential examples similar to those
found in descriptive grammars rather than contextualised language in use.
Overall, the content is based on general activities that are roughly related to
learners’ life, but not focusing on specific daily events such as greeting or
doing everyday chores. A few examples are culturally specific and relevant
to the traditional lifestyle, referencing the kangaroo, boomerangs,
windbreaks, and hunting.
Examples 4–7 (pp. 8–9)
resembling examples in
descriptive grammars, e.g.,
“The dog bit the child”;
examples 66, 74–77 (pp. 29,
31–32), being culturally
relevant and meaningful.
Comprehensible While not much of input of language in use is provided, the sentential
examples are presumably comprehensible because of the rather general and
Pp. 34–35, on question words,
e.g., “What’s this?” (example
82
basic meanings they convey. However, since there are only minimal
examples for each structure, whether the actual realisation of the structures
is adequately comprehensible can be in question.
83), “Why did he get sick?”
(example 87).
Phonetics and phonology: Disciplinary terms are used substantially but
with plain explanation. The assumed phonetic and phonological knowledge
of English of users are also utilised as a tool to explain jargon.
Grammar: Jargon is also used substantially but with explanation and
examples along the way.
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
Para 2, p. 5, on “the teeth
sounds (laminodentals)”; para
2, section 3.1, p. 25: “If you
compare the two sentences you
will see that they differ in only
one respect.”
2 Affectively
engaging
Since the examples are out of context, the content appears unlikely to
arouse emotions. If any, the few instances of culturally specific examples
may be found relatable by Indigenous users, or if an Indigenous user does
not perform traditional cultural practices anymore, such examples may
arouse a sense of nostalgia.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
their learning experience.
Example 34 (p. 18): “I built a
windbreak, for grandfather”;
example 82 (p. 33): “(She’s)
making an artefact, so (they)
will give (her) money.”
3 Cognitively
engaging
This learner’s guide is not task-based but rather a simplified descriptive
grammar. As Goddard explained, “in some places, to make thing simpler to
Para 3, p. 31, on the variations
of the nominalised form of
83
take in, only part of the grammatical facts are presented. . . . This is by no
means a complete or detailed grammar” (p. iv). Yet, there are some explicit
indication in the metalanguage about the achievability of the structure
included.
verbs: “For the learner it is
very little trouble because it is
a natural tendency.”
Despite not being task-based, the content is challenging and require more
of high-level cognitive skills rather than critical and creative thinking. The
challenging nature is explicitly identified by the author by, for example,
stating that “I think it would be fair to say that this system of ergative
marking is somewhat strange for language learners” (p. 23).
Section 2.6 (p. 23), on the split
case system.
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure; there is no
meaning-based text or activity available. As Goddard stated in the preface,
“[t]he aim is to explain the basics of the grammar in a clear way” (p. iv).
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
As Goddard explained, this learner’s guide targets at users living among
fluent speakers; thus, “[t]here are no exercises or conversational hints, as it
is assumed that most users will be hearing Yankunytjatjara or Pitjantjatjara
spoken every day” (p. iv).
This feature is not applicable.
84
6 Open-ended Since there are no practising items, this principle is not applicable.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is not driven by texts but by the grammar.
8 Culturally
appropriate
Overall, the contents do not explicitly reflect the cultural values of the
Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara speech communities. Yet, some cultural
values are referred to metalinguistically, such as the importance of learning
kinship terms and emotion terms (p. 37). Semantic differences between
English and Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara are also explained by drawing
upon different worldviews (p. 36).
Pp. 36–37, on “some
interesting things about P/Y
words.”
Laughren, Hoogenraad, Hale, and Granites (1996)
A Learner’s Guide to Warlpiri: Wangkamirlipa Warlpirilki
Target audience: English speaking learners.
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich A fair amount of language in use is provided. Although most of the
examples provided are phrases or sentences out of context, they
demonstrate common usage. In Part Five (the last chapter), there are 21
short dialogues, providing input of contextualised language. On the other
hand, this learner’s guide is based on a tape course for beginners recorded
by Hale and Granites, namely, audio tapes are available. The tapes
P. 9: A short Warlpiri
conversation is recorded in the
tape course.
85
correspond to Part Four and provides rich audio input demonstrating real-
world language.
Re-cycled A fair amount of repetitive language modelling is available, including
several examples for each structure and some reoccurred structures
modelled in the short dialogues in Part Five. Although most of the
modelled structures only occur once throughout the whole guide, there are
explicit lesson instructions guiding learners to revisit previous contents.
P. 6: “Revise and review”; p.
41: “Now go back to the
beginning of lesson one and
revise everything up to here.”
Meaningful Although the contents include more of single phrasal or sentential
examples, instances of contextualised language are evident, including the
dialogues in Part Five. In addition, the tape course itself is authentic, for
one of the developers, Granites, is a Warlpiri man from Yuendumu
(Laughren et al., 1996, p. v).
Overall, the content is based on general activities that are roughly related to
learners’ life, with few instances focusing on specific events. Several
examples are culturally specific and relevant to the traditional lifestyle,
referencing the kangaroo, boomerangs, hunting activities, and so on.
P. 25, the section “Your
teacher might use expressions
like the followings”; dialogues
19–21 (pp. 183–185), on
hospital, clinic and shop
settings, respectively.
Comprehensible The content is overall comprehensible for learners since this learner’s guide
is developed based on the tape course made for beginners. The phrasal and
sentential examples provided also convey general and basic meanings.
P. 82, glosses for on ergative
endings.
86
Several examples are given glosses with word-for-word translation and
syntactic information.
Phonetics and phonology: Disciplinary terms are used moderately and
with plain explanation. The assumed phonetic and phonological knowledge
of English of users are also utilised as a tool to explain jargon. Sound files
are provided to demonstrate pronunciation, enhancing the
comprehensibility of the metalanguage.
Grammar: Jargon is mainly used as section titles in Part Four. The
concepts are clearly explained and demonstrated with plain language,
examples and assumed English knowledge.
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
P. 15, on palatal sounds, e.g.,
“The Warlpiri sound written j
may sound something like the
English ch or j sounds”; p. 84,
“Learning hint.”
2 Affectively
engaging
Since most of the examples are out of context, the content appears unlikely
to arouse emotions. If any, the few instances of culturally specific examples
may be found relatable by Indigenous users, or if an Indigenous user does
not perform traditional cultural practices anymore, such examples may
arouse a sense of nostalgia.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
their learning experience.
Pp. 116–117: Examples
referencing shooting the
kangaroo; p. 102: “In the
sentences . . ., you can hear . .
.”
87
3 Cognitively
engaging
There are three types of tasks provided, which are all supposed to be
achievable. Firstly, for the translation (Warlpiri into English) and fill-in-
the-gap tasks, the grammatical features are already modelled prior to the
tasks. As for the listen-and-repeat tasks, the content is repetitive and re-
cyclable.
P. 102: Fill-in-the-gap task,
“Listen carefully and write in
the appropriate form of the
dative ending.”
The requirement for high-level, critical and creative thinking is not
prominent in order to complete the fill-in-the-gap and listen-and-repeat
tasks because of the drill-and-practice nature. In comparison, for the
translation tasks, higher-level thinking, as well as creative thinking may be
required since exercise items are not modelled word-for-word previously;
only the structure and vocabulary that may be useful are provided.
Pp. 32, 34 & 37, translation
exercises; pp. 147–149: 23
items for a listen-and-repeat
task on pronominals.
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure, but the
organisation of the teaching of structure and meaning-based text/activity is
a mix. In some sections, bits of structure are explained first, followed by
abundant examples whereas in some other sections, explicit teaching of
structure seems to emerge from given meaning-based text/activity. Block
notes (titled e.g., “note,” “learning hint” or “further information”) and
summary tables are inserted intermittently where necessary to address
learners’ attention to more explicit teaching of form or advanced
knowledge as well.
Pp. 46–48, on location endings:
structure first; Lesson 6 (pp.
125–146), on future and past
tenses, continuous vs. non-
continuous actions and
permissive expressions:
phrases first.
88
In other words, the lesson structure partially achieves the process of
addressing learners’ attention to form both whilst and after focusing on
meaning.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There are no communicative practising tasks provided in this learner’s
guide, but learners are explicitly advised to practise the language with
native Warlpiri speakers (Laughren et al., 1996, pp. 6–7).
This feature is not applicable.
6 Open-ended For the fill-in-the-gap practising items, only fixed answers are provided
instead of multiple modelling answers due to the nature of the practices on
grammatical features.
P. 194, answers.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is to some extents text-driven, with its root mostly in
phrasal and sentential examples. However, the more authentic type of text
(i.e., dialogues) are attached towards the end of the guide instead of
inserted in each lesson of Part Four.
The 16 examples on p. 125
drive the teaching of future
tense on p. 126.
8 Culturally
appropriate
Although the main body (i.e., Part Four) of the learner’s guide do not
explicitly reflect the cultural values of the Warlpiri speech community,
constructed rather according to grammatical features, there is a moderate
amount of reference to the culture at the beginning and end of the guide.
Pp. 3–4, on avoidance, taboo
words and names; pp. 186–
193, on kin relations.
89
Nordlinger (1998)
A Learner’s Guide to Basic Wambaya
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich Not much of language in use is provided. A few sentential examples out of
context are in place instead. An exception is the mini narrative on p. 3. On
the other hand, there is certain amount of audio input demonstrating the
language by native speakers Molly Grueman and Judy Holt (Nordlinger,
1998, p. ii), embedded in the pdf file for the mini narrative on p. 3 and
Chapter 2 where the sound system is introduced.
Re-cycled Only minimal repetitive language models are available. There are usually a
few phrasal or sentential examples for each structure, but each instance of
modelling only occurs once throughout the whole guide, instead of
repeating over and over after its first occurrence. Yet, there are explicit
instructions guiding learners to revisit previous contents before moving on
to the next section.
P. 12: “So go back over all of
the words and practice reading
them and writing them.”
Meaningful Although the learner’s guide includes almost only phrasal or sentential
examples (cf. the mini narrative on p. 3), the way Nordlinger draws them
from situational contexts indicates certain levels of reflecting real-world
language. The content is overall based on general activities that are roughly
related to learners’ life but not focusing on specific events, such as doing
P. 25, on commands, e.g.,
“How to tell someone to do
something”; p. 36, on negation,
e.g., “Sometimes we want to
say that someone didn’t or
90
everyday chores. Only minimal instances are culturally specific and
relevant to the traditional lifestyle, referencing spears and camps. On the
other hand, the effort to represent real-world language use is evident by
noting Wambaya speakers’ varied performances of grammatical structures.
won’t do something”; p. 56:
“You and me will go to camp.”
P. 32, “further information” on
speakers’ varied realisation of
present tense forms.
Comprehensible The content is overall comprehensible for learners as this learner’s guide is
essentially designed to ensure comprehensibility according to Nordlinger.
Specifically, “[m]any aspects of the Wambaya language are not covered in
this guide . . ., and some things have been simplified in order to give the
learner an easier start” (Nordlinger, 1998, p. 1). In addition, all examples
are given glosses with word-for-word translation and syntactic information.
Phonetics and phonology: The use of disciplinary terms is minimal.
Where necessary, terms are clearly explained. Sound files are available to
demonstrate pronunciation. The assumed phonetic and phonological
knowledge of Standard Australian English of users are also utilised as a
tool to explain jargon.
Grammar: Jargon is also used minimally and with explanation and
examples along the way. Where necessary, block notes are inserted to
explain terminology more in detailed.
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
P. 10: “. . . (although remember
that the written r in English
often not pronounced, as in
words like water and card)”; p.
28, a block note titled
“terminology” on auxiliary.
91
2 Affectively
engaging
Since the examples are out of context, the content appears unlikely to
arouse emotions. If any, the few instances of culturally specific examples
may be found relatable by Indigenous users, or if an Indigenous user does
not perform traditional cultural practices anymore, such examples may
arouse a sense of nostalgia.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
and interacts with users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners
by drawing from their learning experience. Throughout the guide, “[i]deas
about ways to make the learning fun are [also] given” (Nordlinger, 1998, p.
2).
P. 7: “If you’re not used to it, it
is sometimes difficult to hear
the difference between the d, n
and l (well, it is for me
anyway!)”; p. 20: “Don’t
worry if you are finding it hard
. . .”
3 Cognitively
engaging
The tasks in the learner’s guide are supposed to be achievable. For
example, for the translation (English into Wambaya) and role-play tasks,
the grammatical features are already modelled prior to the tasks. As for the
listen-and-repeat tasks, the content is repetitive and re-cyclable.
P. 12, listen-and-repeat tasks.
The requirement for high-level, critical and creative thinking is not
prominent in order to complete the listen-and-repeat tasks because of the
drill-and-practice nature. In comparison, for the translation and role-play
tasks, higher-level thinking, as well as creative thinking, may be required
since exercise items are not modelled word-for-word previously; only the
structure and vocabulary that may be useful are provided.
P. 52, a translation task on
tenses.
92
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure; there is almost
no meaning-based text or activity available, except for the mini narrative on
p. 3, which is however more for the purpose of training listening
comprehension. Summary tables and block notes (titled e.g., “note,”
“further information” or “warning”) are inserted intermittently where
necessary to address learners’ attention to form or advanced knowledge.
Pp. 33–34, a summary table
and a block note “further
information” on tense
inflection of intransitive and
transitive do.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There is a moderate number of opportunities for practising communicative
skills, including role-play tasks and explicit instructions to practise with
Wambaya speakers or other learners.
Para 2, p. 2.
Role-plays are suggested throughout the guide on how to play around the
modelled structures and phrases with Wambaya speakers or other learners.
In addition, explicit instructions on how to extend the learning into daily
life are also evident.
Pp. 13–14, a task for practising
greetings in daily life; p. 16, a
role-play for asking and
answering to questions.
6 Open-ended There are no multiple modelling answers provided for practising items, nor
any answers provided for the exercises in this learner’s guide. This feature
can be considered open-ended for the role-play tasks since learners thus
need to figure out the answers on their own by exploring through the
materials available throughout the learner’s guide; this feature, linked to
Principle 3, is challenging and requires high-level cognitive skills. Yet, for
93
the given translation tasks, this feature fails to be open-ended because there
are no alternative models available other than the given contents.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is not driven by texts but by the grammar.
8 Culturally
appropriate
Although overall, the contents do not explicitly reflect the cultural values of
the Wambaya speech community, it is explicitly noted that “[l]anguage is
inextricably tied up with culture, and a full understanding of the Wambaya
language can only be developed through respect and openness towards the
culture of the people who speak it” (Nordlinger, 1998, p. 1).
Turpin (2000)
A Learner’s Guide to Kaytetye
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich A fair amount of language in use is provided, including a dialogue in each
lesson in Part Three (12 dialogues in total) and a song. On the other hand,
two audio CDs come with this learner’s guide, providing rich audio input
which demonstrates real-world language. (Note that the CDs are not
accessible at RNLD.)
Appendix 6 (pp. 170–179)
consists of the transcript of
each dialogue and their English
translation; p. 180, a Kaytetye
song “Artweye erlkwe” by
Vincent Janima.
94
Re-cycled There are highly repetitive language models and a structure may occur
multiple times throughout the learner’s guide, including a few examples for
each structure, audio input of a dialogue in each lesson in Part Three, and
visual input of the written dialogues (transcripts) towards the end of the
guide. Reoccurred structures modelled in the dialogues and song are also
evident. Explicit lesson instructions can also be found at the end of each
lesson as a reminder to revisit the previous contents.
P. 37: “At this stage go back
and revise . . .”; p. 180, the
‘where’ question and ‘heading
off / going back to’ structure
modelled recurringly.
Meaningful In addition to the dialogues closely reflecting real-world language in use,
the phrasal and sentential examples are also overall based on both general
activities and specific events; these are meaningful and related to learners’
life. Plentiful culturally specific and relevant language is also present, and
more contemporary settings are also included.
Examples 3–5 on p. 34,
referencing the bush, the emu
and placenames, respectively;
p. 95, based on a shopping
scenario.
Comprehensible The content is overall comprehensible for learners as this learner’s guide is
essentially designed to ensure comprehensibility according to Turpin.
Specifically, “[m]any aspects of the Kaytetye language are not covered in
this publication, and others are simplified to give the learner a good start”
(Turpin, 2000, p. vii). Few instances which may be beyond learners’
comprehension are explicitly marked as “further information.” In addition,
all examples are given glosses with word-for-word translation and syntactic
information. On the other hand, this guide is roughly developed in a staged
P. 39: “Demonstratives can get
quite complex. You will learn
more about them in chapter 6.”
95
manner as the more advanced and complicated structures are only touched
on in the latter parts of the guide.
Phonetics and phonology: Disciplinary terms are used moderately and
with plain explanation. For pronunciation unfamiliar for learners, graphs of
the vocal tracts are provided to demonstrate the manner of articulation.
Plentiful audio demonstration of pronunciation is also available in the CDs.
The assumed phonetic and phonological knowledge of English of users are
also utilised as a tool to explain jargon.
Grammar: As Turpin states, “linguistic and grammar jargon are
[consciously] avoided” (p. vii). Where disciplinary terms are necessary and
helpful for understanding, they are clearly explained with plain English and
examples. The assumed grammatical knowledge of English of users are
also utilised as a tool to explain jargon.
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
P. 25, on velar sounds, e.g., “in
nearly the same place as where
the k and g sounds are made in
English”; p. 59, on transitive
and intransitive verbs.
2 Affectively
engaging
There is a fair amount of culturally specific reference which may be found
relatable by Indigenous users. A range of other emotions may also be
aroused, such as homesickness and nostalgia. The dialogues and song are
likely to affectively engage learners even more.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
Example 15 on p. 50: “I’m
homesick for (my) country”; p.
36, an illustration of a woman
hitting a goanna accompanying
the explanation of alarrenke
meaning either ‘hit’ or ‘kill.’
96
their learning experience. Plentiful illustrations are also inserted
intermittently to accompany relevant themes; such visual input can be a
technique to better engage learners into the experience.
3 Cognitively
engaging
The tasks in the learner’s guide are supposed to be achievable. For
example, for the translation tasks (mostly Kaytetye into English), the
structure and vocabulary required are already modelled prior to the tasks.
As for the listen-and-repeat tasks, the content is repetitive and re-cyclable.
P. 103, “Test your skill 8”:
“Listen to these Kaytetye
sentences on the CD and repeat
them to yourself. Work out
their meaning in English.”
The translation tasks may require more of high-level thinking since
exercise items are not modelled word-for-word previously; only the
structure and vocabulary that may be useful are provided. Yet, since the
learners are assumed to be English speakers, the Kaytetye-to-English
translation exercises may not require creative thinking as much.
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
Explicit teaching of structure emerges from given meaning-based
text/activity. Specifically, each lesson of Part Three starts with a comic
illustration and an accompanying audio recorded dialogue, followed by
explanations on the modelled structure. Block notes (titled e.g., “note,”
“learning hint” or “further information”) and summary tables are inserted
intermittently where necessary to address learners’ attention to more
97
explicit teaching of form or advanced knowledge as well; summary tables
are also attached in Appendix 5 (pp. 167–169).
Overall, the lesson structure achieves the process of addressing learners’
attention to form both whilst and after focusing on meaning.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There are no communicative practicing tasks provided in this learner’s
guide, but learners are explicitly advised to practise the language with
native Kaytetye speakers (Turpin, 2000, p. 6).
Although there are no communicative activities explicitly designed, the rich
sources of illustrations nevertheless provide plentiful potential picture-
description tasks.
6 Open-ended There is only a fixed answer to each translation task provided instead of an
open-ended set of answers.
Appendix 6 (pp. 170–179).
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is text-driven and rooted in authentic texts, including
audio recorded dialogues and comic illustrations.
8 Culturally
appropriate
The content is to some extents constructed within the Kaytetye belief
system and largely refer to the cultural values of the Kaytetye speech
community. The significance of learning the culture is explicitly noted
throughout the guide and particularly in Part One, where Turpin explains
some of the fundamental cultural features which influence the language and
Pp. 2–3, on different ways of
speaking (e.g., with different
interlocutors), handsigns and
polite ways of communication
and names; sections 10.6 &
10.7 (pp. 123–126), on kinship
98
directs learners to “[t]ry to understand the logic of the Kaytetye world
view” (p. 4).
and skin names and how they
influence the pronoun system.
Simpson (2002)
A Learner’s Guide to Warumungu: Mirlamirlajinjjiki Warumunguku Apparrka
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich A moderate amount of language in use is provided. Although most of the
examples provided are phrases or sentences out of context, they
demonstrate common usage and a range of different events. Towards the
end of each chapter, there is a short conversation or a list of useful phrases,
providing input of contextualised language.
Pp. 42–43, greeting phrases.
Re-cycled A moderate amount of repetitive language modelling is available.,
including a few examples for each structure and reoccurred structures
modelled in the conversation at the end of each chapter.
Meaningful Although the learner’s guide includes mostly phrasal or sentential examples
(cf. the conversations), the way Simpson draws them from situational
contexts indicates certain levels of reflecting real-world language. The
content is overall based on both general activities and specific events; these
are meaningful and related to learners’ life. Plentiful culturally specific and
P. 31, a conversation on self-
introduction, e.g., “What’s
your skin?”; p. 63: “For
hunting” vs. “Why did he give
him injections?”; pp. 66–67, a
99
relevant language is also present, for instance, referencing skin names,
regional animals and traditional items, and more contemporary settings are
also included. On the other hand, the effort to represent real-world
language use is evident by noting older and younger Warumungu speakers’
varied performances.
conversation about cooking; p.
122, block note titled
“Warning!” on the different
realisations of the suffix -ngara
between old and young people.
Comprehensible The content is overall comprehensible for learners as this learner’s guide is
essentially designed to ensure comprehensibility according to Simpson.
Specifically, “some things in this book have been simplified” (Simpson,
2002, p. ix). In addition, all examples are given glosses with word-for-word
translation and syntactic information. On the other hand, this guide is
roughly developed in a staged manner as the more advanced and
complicated structures are only touched on in the last chapter.
Chapter 15 (pp. 148–156), on
more complicated sentences.
Phonetics and phonology: Disciplinary terms are used substantially but
also clearly explained with plain language. The assumed phonetic and
phonological knowledge of English of users are also utilised as a tool to
explain jargon.
Grammar: Where disciplinary terms are necessary and helpful for
understanding, they are clearly explained with plain language and
examples. Appendix 7 especially lists a glossary to define terms used in the
learner’s guide.
Table 1, p. 16, comparing the
consonant sounds of
Warumungu and English, e.g.,
fricatives as “hissing sounds”;
p. 68, on pronouns, e.g., first
person as “the speaker,”
second person as “the hearer”
and third person as “other
people.”
100
Overall, the metalanguage directly addresses users and explicitly explains
and draws their attention to the more complex parts.
2 Affectively
engaging
Although most of the examples are out of context, the contents cover a
range of events that users might find relatable to the contemporary lifestyle
(e.g., schools and shops). Instances of culturally specific examples and
conversations may arouse a sense of nostalgia if an Indigenous user does
not perform traditional cultural practices anymore.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
their learning experience. Communicative activities may also be able to
make the learning a fun experience.
P. 84, a conversation on
introducing oneself referring to
skin names and the kinship
system; section 12.2 (p. 121),
on describing actions, e.g.,
“When we do something, we
may do it in a certain way –
slowly or quickly, well or
badly, correctly or incorrectly.”
3 Cognitively
engaging
The tasks in the learner’s guide are supposed to be achievable since the
structure and vocabulary required are already modelled prior to the tasks.
The tasks overall require high-level, critical and creative thinking since
exercise items are not modelled word-for-word previously; only the
structure and vocabulary that may be useful are provided.
Pp. 54–55, exercises on
analysing structure; p. 85, a
translation task (English into
Warumungu); p. 114,
knowledge checking and
brainstorming tasks, e.g.,
101
“Miyil is eye. What are miyili-
kari?”
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure. Although there
are meaning-based texts available, they are rather attached towards the end
of each chapter than being drawn upon before the teaching of structure.
Summary tables and block notes (titled “note” and “warning!”) are inserted
intermittently where necessary to address learners’ attention to form or
advanced knowledge; summary tables are also attached in appendices.
Appendices 2–4 (pp. 161–170),
on verb forms, actor endings
and pronouns, respectively.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There is a fair number of opportunities for practising communicative skills,
including role-play tasks and explicit instructions to practise with
Warumungu speakers or other learners
P. 2: “If you have a friend who
is learning Warumungu,
practise conversations with
them – make up your own, as
well as trying the dialogues
given in this book.”
Role-plays are suggested in some of the exercise sections (at the end of
each chapter) on how to play around the modelled structures and phrases
with Warumungu speakers or other learners.
Pp. 98–99, role-play tasks on
practising the use of nouns and
pronouns.
6 Open-ended For tasks like syntactic analysis, brainstorming and translation, there are
fixed answers due to the either right or wrong nature. As for role-play
tasks, while there are no multiple modelling answers provided, the answers
Pp. 159–160.
102
of the exercises in this learner’s guide are nevertheless open-ended—no set
answers are provided. Learners thus need to figure out the answers on their
own by exploring through the materials available throughout the learner’s
guide; this feature, linked to 3, is challenging and requires high-level
cognitive skills.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is not driven by texts but by the grammar. The
authentic texts available (i.e., conversations) are attached at the end of each
chapter but not the start point or major source of learning (cf. new
vocabulary emerging from the conversations).
8 Culturally
appropriate
The content is overall constructed within the Warumungu belief system and
largely refer to the cultural values of the Warumungu speech community.
The significance of learning the culture is explicitly noted throughout the
guide, especially in the preface (p. ix), where the worldview of the
Warumungu people in regard to the language is acknowledged and
explained.
P. 2: “Memorise people’s skin
names, and practise
relationship terms”; Chapter 4
(pp. 29–36), on the family;
para 1, p. 59, on the cultural
differences between Europeans
and Warumungu people in
asking questions.
103
Green (2005)
A Learner’s Guide to Eastern and Central Arrernte: Revised Edition
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich A moderate amount of language in use is provided. Although most of the
examples provided are phrases or sentences out of context, they
demonstrate common usage. In Chapter 7 (the last chapter), there are four
brief examples of conversations and a song, providing input of
contextualised language. On the other hand, an audio cassette comes with
this learner’s guide, providing rich audio input which demonstrates real-
world language. (Note that only the older version of audio cassette is
available in the library of the University of Melbourne; this latest version is
not.)
Section 2.2 (p. 17): “The most
common form of greeting in
Arrernte is . . . The common
response to this is . . .”; pp. 92–
93, an Arrernte song “Unte
Nthenhe-arenye?” by Group
9692.
Re-cycled Only minimal repetitive language models are available. There are usually
only a few phrasal or sentential examples for each structure. Some of the
structures are modelled repetitively in the simple dialogues and song in
Chapter 7. Other instances of modelling only occur once throughout the
whole guide, instead of repeating over and over after its first occurrence.
Pp. 92–93, the song provides
repetitive structures of “Where
are you from?”, “I’m from . .
.”, and the imperative “Tell
me!”
Meaningful Although the learner’s guide includes mostly phrasal or sentential examples
(cf. the conversations and song), the way Green draws them from
situational contexts indicates certain levels of reflecting real-world
P. 24, the section “how to tell
someone not to do something”;
example 75 (p. 36): “We are
104
language. In addition, Green does consciously develop the material to
authentically reflect “the way Arrernte people speak today”; therefore, “[i]n
this learner’s guide we have sometimes used an English word in an
example sentence” (Green, 2005, p. 2). Overall, the content is based on
both general activities and specific events, such as greeting; these are
meaningful and related to learners’ life. A fair amount of culturally specific
and relevant language is also present, for instance, referencing placenames,
regional animals and traditional items.
going for (witchetty) grubs”;
examples 87, 91–93, 95 (pp.
38–41), referencing
placenames.
Comprehensible The content is overall comprehensible for learners as this learner’s guide is
essentially designed to ensure comprehensibility according to Green.
Specifically, “[m]any aspects of the Arrernte language are not covered in
this publication, and others are simplified to give the learner a good start”
(Green, 2005, p. vi). Few instances which may be beyond learners’
comprehension are explicitly marked as “further information.”
P. 60, “further information” on
the pronoun system reflecting
kinship, e.g., “it is beyond the
scope of the beginning learner
of these languages to master
this system completely.”
Phonetics and phonology: The use of disciplinary terms is minimal.
Where necessary, terms are clearly explained. Otherwise, the content is
elaborated with plain language. For pronunciation unfamiliar for learners,
graphs of the vocal tracts are provided to demonstrate the manner of
articulation. The assumed phonetic and phonological knowledge of English
of users are also utilised as a tool to explain jargon.
Pp. 9–10, graphs; pp. 53–54,
tables for English pronouns vs.
Arrernte pronouns.
105
Grammar: As Green states, “linguistic jargon is [consciously] kept to a
minimum” (p. 17). Where disciplinary terms are necessary and helpful for
understanding, they are clearly explained with plain English and examples.
2 Affectively
engaging
Although the examples are mostly out of context, there is a fair amount of
culturally specific reference which may be found relatable by Indigenous
users. A range of other emotions may also be aroused, such as
homesickness and nostalgia. The dialogues and song in Chapter 7 are likely
to affectively engage learners even more.
On the other hand, in terms of the metalanguage which directly addresses
users, it can be a technique to affectively engage learners by drawing from
their learning experience. Some illustrations are also inserted intermittently
to accompany relevant themes; such visual input can be a technique to
better engage learners into the experience.
Example 79 (p. 36): “I’m
homesick for (my) country”; p.
40, e.g., “In 1942 we shifted
from Charles Creek to
Arltunga”; convo 4 (p. 96), on
cooking a goanna.
Section 2.4 (p. 18), e.g., “From
the above examples you can
also see . . .”; “In Arrernte if
you want to say . . .”
3 Cognitively
engaging
This learner’s guide is not task-based, but the content is assumed
achievable given its simplified nature of introducing structure.
While not being task-based, the content is challenging to certain extent due
to the differences in pronunciation and grammar between Arrernte and
English. Yet, the requirement for critical and creative thinking abilities is
not prominent.
106
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
focusing on
meaning
The focus of this learner’s guide is essentially on structure. Although there
are meaning-based texts available, they are rather attached towards the end
of the guide (Chapter 7) than being drawn upon before the teaching of
structure. Block notes (titled e.g., “beware,” “note” or “further
information”) are inserted intermittently where necessary to address
learners’ attention to form or advanced knowledge.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There are no communicative practising tasks provided in this learner’s
guide.
This feature is not applicable.
6 Open-ended Since there are no practising items, this principle is not applicable.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is not driven by texts but by the grammar. The
authentic texts available (i.e., four dialogues and a song) are attached
towards the end of the guide but not the start point or source of learning.
8 Culturally
appropriate
The content is partially constructed within the Arrernte belief system,
especially Chapter 3, where pronouns and kinship are covered. The
contents, on the other hand, largely refer to the cultural values of the
Arrernte speech community. The significance of learning the culture is
explicitly noted throughout the guide and particularly in Chapter 1, where
Green directs learners to “[t]ry to understand the logic of the Arrernte
P. 3, on handsigns and polite
ways of communicating; p. 4,
on naming; p. 23, politeness in
imperative; p. 56–63, on
kinship.
107
world view, and [not to] assume that it is a mirror image of your own” (p.
1).
Amery and Simpson (2013)
Kulurdu Marni Ngathaitya! Sounds Good to Me! A Kaurna Learner’s Guide
Principle Feature Description Examples
1 Rich There is rich input of language in use provided, including sentences
documented by field linguists and plentiful examples of conversation and
contextualised language, such as how to talk with friends. On the other
hand, a CD comes with this learner’s guide, including PowerPoint
presentations, Kaurna sound recordings and interviews with community
people and the authors. It provides rich audio input which demonstrates
real-world language. (Note that the CD is not accessible in the library of the
University of Melbourne.)
Pp. 99–100, from early
documentation; Chapter 2 (pp.
60–65), on talking with friends
in different occasions.
Re-cycled There are highly repetitive language models, including several examples
for each structure. A structure may also occur multiple times throughout the
learner’s guide.
Pp. 43 & 150–151, on “how
many,” “how much,” and “how
often.”
Meaningful The contents closely reflect real-world language in use and are related to
learners’ life, especially in Part 1 of the guide, where each chapter is
Chapter 12 (pp. 66–73), in the
home setting, e.g., section 12.2
108
themed with a specific social context. Amery and Simpson (2013) also
explicitly point out the significance of “learn[ing] the words for things
around us” (p. 66). On the other hand, the sources of exemplified language
are meaningful and authentic in the sense that they are drawn from previous
field documentation.
exemplifies language used for
discussing TV shows.
Comprehensible The content is assumed to be comprehensible because of the general and
basic meanings the examples convey. In addition, repetitive models are
available, which can help with reinforcing learners’ comprehension
throughout the course of learning. Side notes on the margins are also
inserted intermittently to explain advanced information.
P. 99, on intonation and vowel
change.
Phonetics and phonology: Disciplinary terms are used substantially but
also clearly explained with plain language. For pronunciation unfamiliar for
learners, graphs of the vocal tracts are provided to demonstrate the manner
of articulation. The assumed phonetic and phonological knowledge of
English or other languages (e.g., Indonesian) of users are also utilised as a
tool to explain jargon.
Grammar: Where disciplinary terms are necessary and helpful for
understanding, they are clearly explained with plain language and
examples. Chapter 5 is especially set out to clarify terms used in previous
documentation and how jargon will be explained and help the learning.
Learners are also advised by Amery and Simpson (2013) “[not to] worry
P. 33, the side note on the
margin explaining the voiced
velar nasal; p. 26, explaining
the abbreviations used by
Teichelmann and Schürmann.
109
too much about the technical terms. It’s more important to follow the
examples” (p. 27).
2 Affectively
engaging
The content is very likely to arouse emotions, such as excitement when it
comes to themes like football and fishing. Conversations drawn from real-
life experience are usually amusing and relatable. The variety of
communicative activities may also be able to make the learning a fun
experience. On the other hand, plentiful illustrations are inserted
intermittently to accompany relevant themes; such visual input can be a
technique to better engage learners into the experience.
P. 63, asking a friend out for
the film Ten Canoes; p. 73,
bathtime conversation; Chapter
15 (pp. 84 –87), on football;
Chapter 16 (pp. 88 –92), on
fishing.
3 Cognitively
engaging
The tasks in the learner’s guide are supposed to be achievable since the
structure and vocabulary required are already modelled prior to the tasks.
P. 92, exercise on sentences
that may be used during
fishing.
The tasks require high-level, critical and creative thinking since exercise
items are not modelled word-for-word previously; only the structure and
vocabulary that may be useful are provided.
4 Addressing
learners’
attention to form
whilst or after
Explicit teaching of structure emerges from given meaning-based
text/activity. Specifically, the learner’s guide is designed with two parts,
with Part 1 focusing on meaning-based contents and Part 2 explaining
structure. In Part 1, for a few instances where explicit clarification of
structure is necessary, brief side notes are provided.
Chapters 10 (pp. 46–59) vs. 24
(pp. 178–194), on talking about
space and time.
110
focusing on
meaning
Overall, there is only the process of addressing learners’ attention to form
after focusing on the meaning, but the whilst process is absent. The two
parts do not connect very well, either, given the mismatching chapter
division in Part 1 and Part 2.
5 Providing
plentiful
opportunities for
communication
There are plentiful opportunities for practising communicative skills due to
the highly conversation-oriented nature of the material. Some
communicative practising tasks are consciously designed.
The communicative activities are overall based on scenarios or illustrations,
getting learners to make use of their real-life experience to practise the
structure. The rich sources of illustrations also provide plenty of potential
picture-description tasks.
Section 10.2.2.3 (p. 52): a
game on asking for directions
based on a map on p. 51; p. 64:
a role-play practice for talking
on the phone.
6 Open-ended While there are no multiple modelling answers provided for practising
items, the answers of the exercises in this learner’s guide are nevertheless
open-ended—no set answers are provided. Learners thus need to figure out
the answers on their own by exploring through the materials available
throughout the learner’s guide; this feature, linked to Principle 3, is
challenging and requires high-level cognitive skills.
Pp. 36–41, 49 & 92.
7 Text-driven This learner’s guide is overall text-driven and rooted in authentic texts,
including conversations, email letters and comic illustrations. Although
Pp. 47, 60 & 83: comics; p. 65:
emails.
111
relevant vocabulary and expressions are usually provided in advance, the
learning is largely focused on the texts.
8 Culturally
appropriate
The content is overall constructed within the Arrernte belief system and
largely refer to the cultural values of the Kaurna speech community. As
Amery and Simpson (2013) note, information included in this learner’s
guide “has been gleaned from every known Kaurna source recorded and set
against knowledge still retained by members of the Kaurna community” (p.
xiii, emphasis added).
Chapters 11 (pp. 60–65), 13
(pp. 74–79) & 14 (pp. 80–83),
respectively on talking with
friends, children and Elders
according to cultural values.
112
Appendix B: Interview Protocol
1. Background information: Can you briefly describe your academic linguistics
training background and what kind of language works you have done with
Indigenous communities?
2. What kind of experience do you have with learner’s guides?
3. Have you tried to learn a language on your own with any learner’s guides?
4. Could you briefly describe some of the pros and cons of the learner’s guide(s) that
you have seen/used?
5. What challenges or potential issues have you encountered when using a learner’s
guide?
6. From your experience, what are the learning purposes and needs of Indigenous
communities that you have worked with?
7. Do you think existing learner’s guides could serve to their needs?
8. What kind of modification would you suggest in order to meet users’ needs?
9. What is your opinion about incorporating cultural materials in learner’s guides?
10. From your experience working with Indigenous communities, what aspects of
current learner’s guides can effectively facilitate learning?
11. What kind of challenge would communities likely encounter with using learner’s
guides when they do not have formal linguistics training? More specifically, e.g.,
the learning of grammar, phonetics and phonology, vocabulary?
12. With linguistics background yourself, how would you react to such issues to
facilitate the learning with current materials?
13. In your own experience in developing a learner’s guide template, what are your
main concerns and focuses?
14. What efforts have you made in order to improve the current state of learner’s
guides?
15. Is your template similar to the structure of existing learner’s guides? Or more like a
college language textbook for, say, Spanish, with lots of activities?
16. Have you encountered any challenges during the process of creating the template,
especially when there are no fluent speakers or no sufficient materials around?
Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne
Author/s:
Chiang, Yu-Ting
Title:
Australian Indigenous language learner’s guides for revitalisation: language acquisition and
materials evaluation
Date:
2019
Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/11343/225791
File Description:
Complete thesis
Terms and Conditions:
Terms and Conditions: Copyright in works deposited in Minerva Access is retained by the
copyright owner. The work may not be altered without permission from the copyright owner.
Readers may only download, print and save electronic copies of whole works for their own
personal non-commercial use. Any use that exceeds these limits requires permission from
the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from these works.